Origins and destinations study of older persons

ORIGINS AND DESTINATIONS
STUDY OF OLDER PERSONS
Final Report 614
Prepared by:
Kathleen L. Andereck, Ph. D.
Tourism Consultant
8134 W. Palmaire Avenue
Glendale, AZ 85303
James McCabe, Ph. D.
ElderCare Resources
Assisted by: Leah Wyllys and Kathryn Pruess
JUNE 2008
Prepared for:
Arizona Department of Transportation
206 South 17th Avenue
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
in cooperation with
U. S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
The contents of the report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for
the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not
necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Arizona Department of
Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not
constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. Trade or manufacturers’
names which may appear herein are cited only because they are considered
essential to the objectives of the report. The U. S. Government and The State of
Arizona do not endorse products or manufacturers.
Technical Report Documentation Page
1. Report No.
FHWA- AZ- 08- 614
2. Government Accession No.
3. Recipient’s Catalog No.
4. Title and Subtitle
5. Report Date
June 2008
ORIGINS AND DESTINATIONS STUDY OF OLDER PERSONS 6. Performing Organization Code
7. Authors
Kathleen L. Andereck, Ph. D.; James McCabe, Ph. D.
8. Performing Organization Report No.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
Tourism Consultant, 8134 W. Palmaire Ave., Glendale, AZ 85303
10. Work Unit No.
11. Contract or Grant No.
SPR- PL- 1-( 69) 614
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
206 S. 17TH AVENUE
13. Type of Report & Period Covered
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85007
Project Manager: John Semmens
14. Sponsoring Agency Code
15. Supplementary Notes
Prepared in cooperation with the U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration
16. Abstract
The purpose of this research was to help provide insight into the travel behavior and transportation needs of older persons in
Pima County. Several methods of data collection were done including face- to- face in- home interviews of seniors with
mobility limitations, interviews with seniors who attended senior centers, and a mail survey to a sample that was
representative of seniors in Pima County. The results of the study suggest that seniors are primarily responsible for meeting
their own transportation needs. However as these seniors age, they are facing more challenges in managing their needs to
travel freely around their communities. The seniors we surveyed at the senior centers are more at risk than the seniors we
surveyed through the mailed survey because of lower income, lower health status, and a larger number who live alone.
Seniors’ driving habits are changing. Almost half report driving less in the past 2 years and 40% of respondents had no
knowledge of public transportation services available in their communities. While 71% would prefer a friend or family
member to drive when they cannot, seniors who live alone will have limited options.
The lack of transportation services can have a significant impact on quality of life for these seniors. Many cited less
participation in leisure activities because of driving less. More than half feel that it would be difficult to remain in their
current home if they are no longer able to drive. In fact, 24% have moved into a new residence since they stopped driving.
Seniors need more transportation options to stay active and involved. The vast majority of the “ trips” they make on a
daily/ weekly basis are for social events, to do “ errands”, or go to church.
Seniors feel that improving the quality of transportation services in the community will involve more dependable
transportation and having a variety of options for transportation services.
17. Key Words
Senior citizens, older persons, transportation, mobility,
driving behavior, barriers, community transportation
18. Distribution Statement
Document is available to the
U. S. public through the
National Technical Information
Service, Springfield, Virginia
22161
23. Registrant’s Seal
19. Security Classification
Unclassified
20. Security Classification
Unclassified
21. No. of Pages
64
22. Price
SI* ( MODERN METRIC) CONVERSION FACTORS
APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI UNITS APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS FROM SI UNITS
Symbol When You Know Multiply By To Find Symbol Symbol When You Know Multiply By To Find Symbol
LENGTH
LENGTH
in inches 25.4 millimeters mm mm millimeters 0.039 inches in
ft feet 0.305 meters m m meters 3.28 feet ft
yd yards 0.914 meters m m meters 1.09 yards yd
mi miles 1.61 kilometers km km kilometers 0.621 miles mi
AREA
AREA
in2 square inches 645.2 square millimeters mm2 mm2 Square millimeters 0.0016 square inches in2
ft2 square feet 0.093 square meters m2 m2 Square meters 10.764 square feet ft2
yd2 square yards 0.836 square meters m2 m2 Square meters 1.195 square yards yd2
ac acres 0.405 hectares ha ha hectares 2.47 acres ac
mi2 square miles 2.59 square kilometers km2 km2 Square kilometers 0.386 square miles mi2
VOLUME VOLUME
fl oz fluid ounces 29.57 milliliters mL mL milliliters 0.034 fluid ounces fl oz
gal gallons 3.785 liters L L liters 0.264 gallons gal
ft3 cubic feet 0.028 cubic meters m3 m3 Cubic meters 35.315 cubic feet ft3
yd3 cubic yards 0.765 cubic meters m3 m3 Cubic meters 1.308 cubic yards yd3
NOTE: Volumes greater than 1000L shall be shown in m3.
MASS
MASS
oz ounces 28.35 grams g g grams 0.035 ounces oz
lb pounds 0.454 kilograms kg kg kilograms 2.205 pounds lb
T short tons ( 2000lb) 0.907 megagrams
( or “ metric ton”)
mg
( or “ t”)
Mg megagrams
( or “ metric ton”)
1.102 short tons ( 2000lb) T
TEMPERATURE ( exact)
TEMPERATURE ( exact)
º F Fahrenheit
temperature
5( F- 32)/ 9
or ( F- 32)/ 1.8
Celsius temperature º C º C Celsius temperature 1.8C + 32 Fahrenheit
temperature
º F
ILLUMINATION ILLUMINATION
fc foot candles 10.76 lux lx lx lux 0.0929 foot- candles fc
fl foot- Lamberts 3.426 candela/ m2 cd/ m2 cd/ m2 candela/ m2 0.2919 foot- Lamberts fl
FORCE AND PRESSURE OR STRESS
FORCE AND PRESSURE OR STRESS
lbf poundforce 4.45 newtons N N newtons 0.225 poundforce lbf
lbf/ in2 poundforce per
square inch
6.89 kilopascals kPa kPa kilopascals 0.145 poundforce per
square inch
lbf/ in2
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................ 1
I. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................... 3
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY...................................................................................... 3
STUDY METHODS................................................................................................... 3
II. LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................... 5
OLDER PEOPLE AND MOBILITY ......................................................................... 5
Transportation and Adapting to Aging ................................................................. 6
Reasons for Transportation Adaptations............................................................... 8
Summary ............................................................................................................... 9
III. INTERVIEW, DIARY AND SURVEY RESULTS............................................. 11
INTERVIEWS WITH MOBILITY IMPAIRED SENIORS .................................... 11
TRAVEL DIARIES OF SENIOR CENTER ATTENDEES.................................... 13
Profile of Respondents........................................................................................ 14
Changes in Driving Behavior.............................................................................. 16
Daily Trip Behavior ............................................................................................ 18
Weekly Trip Behavior......................................................................................... 22
MAIL SURVEY OF PIMA COUNTY SENIORS................................................... 23
Nature of the Sample – Demographics ............................................................... 23
Driving Behavior of Respondents....................................................................... 26
Perceptions of Transportation in the Community............................................... 32
Knowledge and Use of Public Transportation .................................................... 35
Driving Experience ............................................................................................. 37
IV. CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................... 41
V. RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................................ 43
APPENDIX A: OPEN ENDED RESPONSES ........................................................... 45
REFERENCES.............................................................................................................. 57
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Places interviewees need to go ........................................................................ 11
Table 2 Residence of respondents................................................................................. 13
Table 3 Senior centers attended by respondents ........................................................... 13
Table 4 Gender of respondents ..................................................................................... 14
Table 5 Age of respondents .......................................................................................... 14
Table 6 Retirement status.............................................................................................. 14
Table 7 Education level................................................................................................. 14
Table 8 Income.............................................................................................................. 15
Table 9 Household composition ................................................................................... 15
Table 10 Health status..................................................................................................... 15
Table 11 Changes in participation of leisure activities over the last two years .............. 15
Table 12 Driving status of respondents........................................................................... 15
Table 13 Vehicle ownership of respondents ................................................................... 16
Table 14 Driving status of respondent’s spouses............................................................ 16
Table 15 Retirement status of spouse ............................................................................. 16
Table 16 Health status of spouse..................................................................................... 16
Table 17 Driving reduction............................................................................................. 16
Table 18 Driving cessation ............................................................................................. 17
Table 19 Changes in driving habits................................................................................. 17
Table 20 Driving reduction............................................................................................. 17
Table 21 Daily destinations of seniors............................................................................ 18
Table 22 Purpose of daily trips ....................................................................................... 19
Table 23 Form of transportation used ............................................................................. 20
Table 24 Pay for the ride................................................................................................. 20
Table 25 Times left house............................................................................................... 20
Table 26 Times returned to house................................................................................... 20
Table 27 Reasons for not going out ................................................................................ 21
Table 28 Weekly destinations ......................................................................................... 22
Table 29 Transportation related problems ...................................................................... 23
Table 30 Gender and age of respondent.......................................................................... 23
Table 31 Other members of household ........................................................................... 24
Table 32 Education level of respondents ........................................................................ 24
Table 33 Employment status of respondents .................................................................. 24
Table 34 Ethnicity/ race of respondents........................................................................... 25
Table 35 Annual household income before taxes ........................................................... 25
Table 36 Current health status of respondent.................................................................. 25
Table 37 Changes in participation of leisure activities over the last two years .............. 25
Table 38 Have current driver’s license ........................................................................... 26
Table 39 Currently drives ............................................................................................... 26
Table 40 Former driver ................................................................................................... 26
Table 41 At least one other person in household drives ................................................. 26
Table 42 Someone in household owns a vehicle ............................................................ 26
Table 43 Reduced driving in past two years ................................................................... 27
Table 44 Stopped driving in the past two years .............................................................. 27
Table 45 Altered driving habits with age........................................................................ 27
Table 46 Type of transportation used ............................................................................. 28
Table 47 Number of trips away from residence to another place
during a typical week ....................................................................................... 28
Table 48 Number of times drove self for trips away from residence
during a typical week ....................................................................................... 29
Table 49 Number of times participant went out ............................................................. 29
Table 50 Type of transportation used ............................................................................. 30
Table 51 Reasons for not going out ................................................................................ 30
Table 52 Getting around in the future if unable to drive ................................................ 31
Table 53 How often rode with someone else in the last two months.............................. 31
Table 54 Person rode with when riding with someone else............................................ 31
Table 55 Concerns when getting a ride with someone else ............................................ 32
Table 56 Difficult to continue to reside in current home if no longer able to drive ....... 32
Table 57 Satisfaction with ability to get around in community...................................... 32
Table 58 Quality of transportation services in community............................................. 33
Table 59 If still driving, recommendations to improve driving conditions
in community or area ....................................................................................... 33
Table 60 Driving difficulties in community ................................................................... 34
Table 61 Concerns about local traffic, roads, streets and street signs in community ..... 35
Table 62 Knowledge of public transportation available in community
( not including taxis) ......................................................................................... 36
Table 63 Amount of personal public transportation usage in past two months.............. 36
Table 64 If public transportation is available, the extent of problems
associated with usage....................................................................................... 36
Table 65 Respondent was a driver in the past................................................................. 37
Table 66 Number of years since stopped driving ........................................................... 37
Table 67 Moved to new residence since they stopped driving ....................................... 37
Table 68 Transportation problems influenced decision to move.................................... 37
Table 69 The extent that transportation problems interfere with specific trips .............. 38
Table 70 Affect the following problems had on the decision to stop driving................. 39
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this research was to provide insight into the travel behavior and
transportation needs of older persons in Pima County. Several methods of data collection
were done including face- to- face in- home interviews of seniors with mobility limitations,
interviews with seniors who attended senior centers, and a mail survey to a sample that
was representative of seniors in Pima County.
The results of the study suggest that seniors are primarily responsible for meeting their
own transportation needs. However as they age, they are facing more challenges in
managing their needs to travel freely around their communities. The seniors we surveyed
at the senior centers are more at risk than the seniors we surveyed through the mailed
survey because of lower income, lower health status, and a larger number who live alone.
Seniors make an average of 8.87 trips a week. Seniors report driving themselves for
almost 90% of those trips,. Less than 5% of seniors interviewed use any type of public or
senior/ disabled transportation services. For seniors who are “ mobility impaired” the
feeling is that public transportation is not usable because of their special needs, or long
waits, or they live in areas where these services are not available
Seniors’ driving habits are changing. Almost half report driving less in the past two years,
and 40% of respondents had no knowledge of public transportation services available in
their communities. While 71% would prefer a friend or family member to drive when
they cannot, seniors who live alone will have limited options.
The lack of transportation services can have a significant impact on quality of life for
these seniors. 25% cited less participation in leisure activities because of driving less.
56% feel that it would be difficult to remain in their current home if they are no longer
able to drive. In fact, 24% have moved into a new residence since they stopped driving.
Seniors need more transportation options to stay active and involved. The vast majority
of the “ trips” they make on a daily/ weekly basis are for social events, to do “ errands”, or
go to church.
Seniors feel that improving the quality of transportation services in the community will
involve more dependable transportation and having a variety of options for transportation
services.
2
3
I. INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this research was to help provide insight into the travel behavior and
transportation needs of older persons in Pima County. Issues such as travel within the
home community, barriers to mobility, and transportation needs among older adults
( seniors) have not been well researched. In this study older adults are defined as people
55 and older. This study provides the following information:
• General aspects of travel behavior among seniors in Pima County:
o Where do seniors need to go during the course of their daily lives?
o What means of transportation ( travel mode) do they use?
o How frequently do they take trips within their own communities?
o What is the average distance seniors travel to accomplish common daily
activities?
o What times of day do seniors most commonly travel within their
communities?
• Concerns related to driving and transportation in the community.
• Mobility constraints among seniors in Pima County:
o What barriers and constraints do seniors perceive with respect to travel in their
communities?
o How do they feel these barriers and constraints might be overcome?
o How do mobility issues affect seniors’ access to various services ( such as
health care, shopping, religious services, etc.) and social opportunities ( such
as senior centers, visits to family and friends, etc.)?
• Unmet transportation needs of seniors.
• Demographics of seniors.
STUDY METHODS
This project began with a comprehensive literature review of transportation needs and
issues with respect to older persons. This portion of the project is presented in section
two. The data collection phase involved two survey efforts and several interviews, the
results of which are presented in section three.
A first project component included interviews with 20 mobility impaired seniors. This
qualitative data focused specifically on the needs of seniors who are mobility impaired.
Participants were identified through My House Senior Living, an organization that works
with mobility impaired populations, and the Pima Council on Aging. Staff from My
House Senior Living volunteered to conduct the interviews as they were already known to
participants. Interviewees were asked who they live with ( if anyone); where they usually
need to go and how they get there; if they use public transportation, how difficult it is to
use, and what would make it easier; and problems they have experienced related to
transportation.
4
The first survey effort was a travel diary given to older adults. Data were collected for the
12 months between October 2006 and September 2007. A convenient sample of 135
seniors who visit senior centers or other senior facilities/ programs was asked to complete
a diary one day a month. There were eight senior centers in Pima County where
individuals were contacted including those in Tucson, Green Valley, Marana and Ajo.
The researchers went to each of the senior centers and gave a presentation to those in
attendance. Participants were enlisted and provided their year’s worth of diaries. Each
was assigned one day a month on which to complete their diaries. A mix of seniors who
have a car and drive as well as those who do not was included. Participants were sent post
card reminders shortly before their assigned date for completion of the diary every
month. The diary asked for travel origin, destination, time of travel, purpose of travel,
and form of transportation used. It also asked what barriers related to transportation, if
any, were encountered. The diary was available in English and Spanish.
The final data collection effort was a mail survey to a random sample of 1,500 older
adults in Pima County. A list was purchased from Survey Sampling, Inc. The survey
focused on perceived barriers to travel in the community, and transportation needs and
issues. A technique commonly used in social science research was used for the mail
survey. This technique employs an initial survey mailing that provides a questionnaire, a
cover letter, and a postage- paid reply envelope to prospective respondents. This was
followed by a post card follow- up to increase sample size. Normally, response rates are
determined by the salience of a study to prospective respondents. Controlling for non-deliverable
surveys ( 32), a 52% response rate was achieved for a final sample size of 760.
This is generally considered to be a good response rate.
To develop the survey instruments snap ® survey software was used. This allowed
scannable questionnaires to be developed, cutting down on data entry error and time. The
data was then exported to the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences for analysis.
5
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
OLDER PEOPLE AND MOBILITY
The expected increase in the number of older drivers has resulted in increased interest in
the issues that face this population. This is an issue not only in the United States, but
internationally as well ( Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003).
Many older people eventually must either adapt their driving behavior as they age or stop
driving altogether. Driving reduction or cessation clearly causes changes in lifestyle
( Bauer, Rottunda and Adler 2003). Mobility, or the ability to travel from one
place to another, is the manner in which people maintain their connection to society.
Ready access to friends and family, health care, social and recreation activities, and
goods and services are necessary to fully participate in everyday life ( Coughlin 2001)
The decreased ability or inability to do this is difficult for older people. Emotional
responses can include feelings of loss of independence and spontaneity, loss of control,
and fear of being a burden to families ( Bauer, Rottunda and Adler 2003; Coughlin
2001; Adler and Rottunda 2006). As well, people who stop driving may
experience depression, loneliness, feelings of isolation, and even illness ( Bauer, Rottunda
and Adler 2003). These emotions have also been associated with adverse social
conditions, including fewer out- of- home activities ( Bauer, Rottunda and Adler 2003;
Hildebrand 2003; Marottoli, Carlos F. Mendes de Leon, and Glass 2000).
Older people engage in local travel for a variety of reasons. The largest portion of trips is
for social and recreational reasons, such as visiting friends. They also take trips for
shopping. Compared to younger people, seniors take more trips for medical purposes and
for religious reasons, but fewer for work and work- related trips. They do most of their
daily driving in mid- day to avoid traffic as compared to younger people who drive more
in the morning, at lunch time, and in the after- work peak ( Collia, Sharp and Giesbrecht
2003).
Effective transportation arrangements contribute to older persons’ social integration by
facilitating community participation, social interaction, access to goods and services
( Glasgow and Blakely 2000), and medical access ( Collia, Sharp and Giesbrecht
2003). Mobility for older people should include the following ( Alsnih and Hensher 2003):
• access to places of desire such as visiting family and friends,
• the psychological benefits of travel where social contact and independence are
important aspects of mobility,
• the benefits of physical movement,
• maintaining social networks, and
• potential travel.
Issues among older drivers include safety concerns, barriers to driving, the manner in
which they are able to adapt their driving practices to compensate for problems they
6
encounter, and reasons for reducing or ceasing to drive ( Raitanen, Tormakangas,
Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003). This review will primarily focus on the barriers
and problems older people experience with respect to transportation and ways in which
they adapt.
Transportation and Adapting to Aging
Driving less. Many studies of older people have found that there is a correspondence
between aging and a reduction in driving. In the U. S., a lower percentage of older adults
report to be drivers than those less than 65 years old. Older people also travel less both
locally and long- distance. Older adults make fewer trips per day than younger adults and
also travel shorter distances ( Collia, Sharp and Giesbrecht 2003; Houser 2005).
A study of older people in three European countries found that a large percentage of
respondents reduced their amount of driving as they aged, with a correlation between age
and driving reduction including both diving less often and driving less distance
( Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003). There also appears to
be differing impacts on women than men, with women reducing driving to a greater
extent than men ( Bauer, Rottunda and Adler 2003; Collia, Sharp and Giesbrecht
2003; Dellinger, Sehgal, Sleet and Barrett- Connor 2001; Gallo, Rebok and
Lesikar 1999; Adler and Rottunda 2006; Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and
Marcellini 2003). This also is the case with people who have lower incomes: they
reduce their driving to a greater extent than those with higher incomes ( Straight 1997).
Older people report a number of difficulties related to road conditions. A study of older
drivers in Rhode Island found that drivers noted, in order of frequency, poor road
conditions, traffic congestion, faded or worn lane markings, headlight glare, fast traffic,
construction zones, merging or switching lanes, driving at night, entering or exiting
highways, narrow lanes, and the ability to see signals and signs as potential problems
( Nelson and Bridges 2006). Other studies have also noted problems among older
drivers with respect to inconsiderate drivers, congestion, night driving, poor roads,
driving costs, crime and fast traffic ( Stowell- Ritter, Straight and Evans 2002). They
reported that the biggest improvement needed is adequate and timely road maintenance
( Nelson and Bridges 2006).
Avoiding difficult traffic situations. Older people report adapting driving to aging by
avoiding difficult traffic situations ( Houser 2005). This includes avoiding driving at
dusk and dawn or at night ( Collia, Sharp and Giesbrecht 2003; Houser 2005;
Adler and Rottunda 2006; Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini
2003; Straight 1997); driving in bad road conditions ( Adler and Rottunda 2006;
Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003); driving in complicated
situations such as complex intersections or junctions ( Raitanen, Tormakangas,
Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003); driving during heavy traffic times
( Collia, Sharp and Giesbrecht 2003; Houser 2005; Raitanen, Tormakangas,
Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003; Straight 1997); driving on busy roads
( Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003); driving long distances
7
( Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003); driving in unfamiliar
areas ( Houser 2005; Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003);
and driving on freeways, highways, and interstates ( Adler and Rottunda 2006;
Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003). As with driving
reductions, women are more heavily influenced by avoidance of difficult situations than
men ( Adler and Rottunda 2006; Alsnih and Hensher 2003; Raitanen, Tormakangas,
Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003). At least in part, this is due to the longer life
expectancy of women as well as higher incidents of disability among older women
( Alsnih and Hensher 2003).
Transportation alternatives. Personal vehicles remain the primary form of transportation
for older people ( Collia, Sharp and Giesbrecht 2003; Houser 2005; Nelson and
Bridges 2006; Adler and Rottunda 2006). Most older people report that driving
is the primary way they get where they need to go ( Stowell- Ritter 2006;
Straight 1997). There is a strong preference for automobile based transportation and
older people express reservation about most alternates to driving ( Coughlin 2001).
Older people feel that automobiles are reliable, convenient, secure, flexible and allow
spontaneity ( Coughlin 2001). Though various forms of alternative transportation
exist for older people, they are often viewed as less desirable than driving oneself ( Bauer,
Rottunda and Adler 2003; Glasgow and Blakely 2000) and some seem to be
more acceptable than others. For some, finding alternatives can be difficult. Older people
note that having to rely on alternative transportation requires planning ahead ( Bauer,
Rottunda and Adler 2003; Adler and Rottunda 2006).
In general, public transportation such as buses is not viewed favorably ( Adler and
Rottunda 2006; Alsnih and Hensher 2003) and use is fairly low ( Collia, Sharp
and Giesbrecht 2003; Nelson and Bridges 2006; Stowell- Ritter 2006). Many
older people feel such options are neither adequate nor responsive to an older
person’s needs. They are described as inconvenient due to fixed schedules and stops or as
difficult to use due to seniors’ physical impairments ( Nelson and Bridges 2006;
Adler and Rottunda 2006; Stowell- Ritter, Straight and Evans 2002; Straight
2003). A primary issue with public buses is they require a certain level of
functional capability some older people do not have ( Glasgow and Blakely 2000).
Older people are also concerned with safety when using public transportation ( Nelson
and Bridges 2006; Adler and Rottunda 2006; Stowell- Ritter, Straight and Evans 2002;
Straight 2003). Other problems noted with respect to public transportation include
lack of shelter and a place to sit while waiting, that it is time consuming, the high
cost, and poor station and vehicle maintenance ( Nelson and Bridges 2006;
Stowell- Ritter 2006). Even so, there has been an increase in use of public trans-portation
by those 75 and older, but this tends to be restricted to those with higher
education and income living in higher residential density areas ( Glasgow and
Blakely 2000; Alsnih and Hensher 2003). Lack of information about community
transportation resources can exacerbate perceived problems ( Coughlin 2001;
Nelson and Bridges 2006) and in rural areas, public transportation is limited
( Glasgow and Blakely 2000; Houser 2005). Senior residences, senior centers, and
other similar facilities provide transportation services. These services are viewed
8
more favorably than public transportation ( Stowell- Ritter, Straight and Evans 2002),
but are often limited in geographic coverage and include limited destinations ( Glasgow
and Blakely 2000; Adler and Rottunda 2006).
Most older people rely on friends and family for transportation when they are unable to
drive ( Bauer, Rottunda and Adler 2003; Glasgow and Blakely 2000; Adler and
Rottunda 2006; Stowell- Ritter 2006) and see this as the preferred alternative to
driving ( Coughlin 2001). However, they often are concerned that they will
become a burden to family and friends ( Bauer, Rottunda and Adler 2003;
Coughlin 2001; Adler and Rottunda 2006; Stowell- Ritter, Straight and Evans
2002). Rides from children are often held in reserve for emergencies or for when the
need is greatest. An increasing problem is the dispersion of families with adult children
living far from their aging parents ( Bauer, Rottunda and Adler 2003). Another
issue is related to the life- styles of children with work and child- care demands ( Alsnih
and Hensher 2003). Many older people feel that riding with friends is preferable
to family as it provides more of a social experience ( Bauer, Rottunda and Adler 2003).
Older people also allow someone other than a spouse to drive their cars thereby
allowing them to use their own vehicle without the feelings of dependency or feeling like
a burden to others. However, there are safety issues with this practice. Often, the other
driver is an adult child, spouse of a child, or grandchild who does not own his or her own
car and is not on the older person’s insurance policy ( Hermanson 2005).
A number of older people report that they walk where they want to go. Walking appears
to be more prevalent than taking public transportation though primarily in urban areas
( Nelson and Bridges 2006). Walking is mentioned more frequently as a transportation
alternative among older people than among younger people ( Collia, Sharp and
Giesbrecht 2003). Trip chains are another response to help reduce driving. This
involves a sequence of stops on a trip to fulfill several purposes and minimize travel
time and distance ( Hensher and Reyes 2000; Alsnih and Hensher 2003).
Older people who are best able to meet their needs seem to have one or more of the
following sources of support ( Alsnih and Hensher 2003):
• spouses or others who drive,
• live with children or have children who live nearby,
• possess sufficient financial resources to purchase transport services,
• are strongly involved in a religious institution,
• reside in communities well serviced by transportation options for non- drivers,
• are physically able to use public transportation, and
• have reduced their activities and expectations to better adapt to their present situation.
Reasons for Transportation Adaptations
The literature suggests that there are two general models related to the mobility of older
people. One suggests that physical ( poor health and disability) and environmental factors
( such as distance and population density) are barriers to the use of transportation
9
alternatives. As well, a number of socio- demographic variables influence transportation
( Rosenbloom 2001). A second model proposes that several qualities of mobility
affect well- being, and these are moderated by socio- demographics and the site ( Carp
1988).
Several studies have considered the reasons older people reduce or stop driving.
Transportation problems increase as people age and experience health problems and the
loss of social networks ( Glasgow and Blakely 2000). The predominant reasons tend
to be less need for driving, often due to retirement from work ( Raitanen, Tormakangas,
Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003; Straight 1997) and health reasons ( Bauer, Rottunda
and Adler 2003; Collia, Sharp and Giesbrecht 2003; Gallo, Rebok and Lesikar 1999;
Adler and Rottunda 2006; Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003).
Other reasons include: difficulty with parking ( Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf
and Marcellini 2003); economic reasons, including the cost of gasoline ( Houser 2005;
Kalata 2005; Adler and Rottunda 2006; Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and
Marcellini 2003; Stowell- Ritter 2006; Straight 1997); hectic traffic ( Raitanen, Torma-kangas,
Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003; Stowell- Ritter 2006); difficulty handling a
car ( Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003); having someone to
do the driving ( Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003); not
having a car ( Glasgow and Blakely 2000; Houser 2005; Raitanen, Tormakangas,
Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003); having a frightening experience while driving
( Adler and Rottunda 2006); influence by family ( Adler and Rottunda 2006); in-fluence
by physicians ( Adler and Rottunda 2006), and inconsiderate drivers
( Stowell- Ritter 2006).
Studies also have been conducted using quantitative measures to determine predictor
variables for driving status. Significant relationships have been found between driving
reduction and increasing age ( Alsnih and Hensher 2003; Raitanen, Tormakangas,
Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003); chronic health conditions and mobility ( Kostyniuk
and Shope 2003; Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003);
increasing mobility related problems ( Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf
and Marcellini 2003); being retired ( Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and
Marcellini 2003); participation in leisure activities, both more or less depending on
the study ( McKnight 2003; Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003).
Summary
There seems to be a trend towards driving reduction and avoiding difficult traffic
conditions, and finally driving cessation, as people get older ( Dellinger, Sehgal, Sleet and
Barrett- Connor 2001; Hakamies- Blomqvist 2006; Adler and Rottunda 2006;
Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003; Stowell- Ritter 2006;
Stowell- Ritter, Straight and Evans 2002). Thus, transportation becomes increasingly
problematic as people age. Results of research suggest that decisions to reduce or
cease driving are complex and affected by many factors. The most influetial
10
reasons seem to be medical problems or deteriorating health ( Bauer, Rottunda
and Adler 2003; Dellinger, Sehgal, Sleet and Barrett- Connor 2001; Persson 1993;
Gebers and Peck 1992; Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003;
Stowell- Ritter, Straight and Evans 2002).
The effects of driving cessation can be emotional, social and even physical. Driving
cessation affects a person’s ability to function independently and participate in the
community thereby negatively influencing quality of life ( Bauer, Rottunda and Adler
2003; Alsnih and Hensher 2003). High levels of mobility are associated with
access, choice, opportunity and freedom ( Burns 1999; Alsnih and Hensher 2003).
As people get older and have more physical problems, they also experience
increasing transportation problems and their satisfaction with their ability to get to the
places they need and want to go decreases ( Stowell- Ritter 2006).
From a policy perspective, a focus on mobility and accessibility initiatives that benefit
older people would include transportation options that provide a sense of independence
and security and allow an individual a sense of dignity ( Alsnih and Hensher 2003).
Older people respond most favorably to transportation options that are convenient
and flexible, allow a certain level of independence, are inexpensive, provide social
contact with others, and are accessible to those with physical limitations and disabilities.
Negative attitudes are found toward options that force people to rely on others, are
difficult for disabled people to access, are expensive, and are restrictive of spontaneity in
trip taking ( Glasgow and Blakely 2000). Buses, for example, need to be physically
easy to negotiate, have schedules convenient for older people, and pick- up and drop- off
points the same to eliminate the need to walk between stops ( Glasgow and Blakely 2000).
Other options include networks of volunteer drivers who provide door- to- door on-demand
service ( Houser 2005). The primary issue is that in many areas, adequate
alternatives to the car for the elderly do not exist.
11
III. INTERVIEW, DIARY AND SURVEY RESULTS
Results from the diaries, surveys and interviews are presented in this section.
INTERVIEWS WITH MOBILITY IMPAIRED SENIORS
Interviews with mobility impaired seniors were conducted with 14 women and six men.
Two of the interviewees are in their 40s, eight in their 60s, and five each in their 70s and
80s. Of this group, 15 live alone, three live with a spouse and child, and two with a child.
All the interviewees must go to the doctor and most go to the pharmacy quite regularly
( Table 1). When they need to go somewhere, eight have a family member who can take
them ( a son or daughter, in one case a niece and in another a parent). The interviewees
also reported that other people or services are available to assist them:
Friend ( 3)
Neighbor ( 2)
Van service ( 8)
Yellow cab ( 4)
Bus ( 2)
Medical transport ( 3)
Other ( 4):
HandiCar ( 2)
Volunteer driver ( 1)
Table 1. Places interviewees need to go
Place to go Frequency How often
Doctor 20 Most respondents at least every 3 months or more,
some several times a month
Pharmacy 12 Most respondents 2 times a month
Other medical 5 Variable
Social events 3 Variable
Senior center 0
Visit family or friends 3 Variable
Grocery store 10 Once a week ( sometimes caregiver goes)
Church 3 Variable
Other 4 Variable
The interviewees were asked if they have a contact in case of emergency. Twelve
reported that they do ( usually a son or daughter, in one case a niece, and in another a
neighbor). One named 911.
Nine of the interviewees said they need to pay for transportation at least some of the time.
Most appear to be using VanTran, which charges a fairly small fee. Only four
12
respondents commented that they use public transportation. When asked what would
make it easier to use transportation services, the following comments were made:
• If they had any here in Catalina.
• It works fine for me.
• It's not possible, I have a catheter.
• If they came to my front door.
• Make faster.
• Don’t know.
• My health is too bad to wait in the sun for a bus.
• I am down a little road over a mile from the bus stop. I would have to take my
scooter there and I don't think they could load my scooter on the bus.
• If the bus could come down my side street and had a wheelchair lift and the driver
could put me in and out of the bus. I don't think that will ever happen.
• I can't take the bus-- no way.
• Sometimes I'll wait three solid hours waiting for yellow cab to come pick me up.
• If there were more buses that come by where I live and close enough I didn't have
to walk far and stand so long.
• The routes are not convenient ( 3 comments).
• Standing in the heat.
• Not sure.
When asked what they do if there is no one available to provide transportation, the
interviewees said:
• If it isn't too far I will walk.
• I take the bus.
• I don't go anywhere ( 9 comments).
• I don't go anywhere unless I can ride my scooter to the corner store.
• If VanTran can't accommodate me I don't go.
• I don't go. I wait until something works out so I can go or someone can go for me.
• Call cab.
• Loose my appointment.
• VanTran.
When asked what problems they have had related to transportation, interviewees noted:
• I just wish there were choices up here.
• None right now. I'm still able to get around… I am slow.
• I manage. If it's a bad day I just stay home.
• Waiting.
• Short notice.
• Too many to count.
• It's just too much trouble.
• If my daughter can't get away from work in the mines to take me somewhere I need to be.
• The seats of buses cut my circulation and when I get up I can't walk.
• Long time to be picked up.
• Waited for more than 3 hours at doctors’ appointments and dialysis.
13
Finally, interviewees were asked to describe an example of a transportation problem they
had at some point. A few shared an experience:
• There just isn't any, and I don't have a car. My children live too far away to help
out. I wish someone could help.
• Was waiting in dialysis for over 4 hours.
• Waited at rehab for 4- 5 hours.
• I missed my yellow cab return trip home and had to wait 5 hours at doctor’s office -
- that did it for me for awhile.
• I have friends and family who have never failed me yet.
• I'm fine now. At first I had a lot of problems but then I found VanTran.
• They forget about an appointment to take me somewhere and I'm late, and it is a
long wait when that happens. I was at the Dr. office 7 hours one day waiting for
them to come pick me up.
• Handi- car is perfect. I have no way to do anything of my own. My friends can't
drive anymore. I have no way to get anywhere other than my medical appointments.
• Where schedule on time never show up both times.
TRAVEL DIARIES OF SENIOR CENTER ATTENDEES
Respondents for the diary study were recruited from senior centers in several
communities in Pima County ( Tables 2 and 3). This group can not be assumed to
represent seniors in general, but can provide some insight into the driving behavior and
transportation needs of older people in the county. ( N = number of respondents.)
Table 2. Residence of respondents ( N= 130)
City of Residence Percent
Ajo 6.4
Benson .9
Green Valley 15.5
Marana 9.1
Tucson 68.1
Table 3. Senior centers attended by respondents ( N= 278)
Senior Center Percent
El Rio 13.8
Armory 12.3
Quincy 16.2
El Pueblo 10.8
East Side 6.2
Marana 8.5
Udall 13.8
Green Valley 13.1
Ajo 5.4
14
Profile of Respondents
The respondents from the senior centers are mostly women and range in age from 52 to
97, with an average of 73 years ( Tables 4 and 5). Most are retired ( Table 6). Their
education level is fairly low, with most having high school level educations or less ( Table
7). Very few have college level education. Incomes are also low, with nearly a third
making $ 20,000 or less per year ( Table 8). Most live alone or with a spouse ( Table 9),
and rate their health as fair or good ( Table 10), and report that their participation in
leisure activities has stayed about the same over the past two years ( Table 11).
Table 4. Gender of respondents ( N= 126)
Gender Percent
Female 77.0
Male 23.0
Table 5. Age of respondents ( N= 116)
Age Percent
50s 3.5
60s 34.3
70s 66.1
80s 26.7
90s 3.5
Mean age 73
Table 6. Retirement status ( N= 126)
Retired Percent
Yes 87.3
No 12.7
Table 7. Education level ( N= 123)
Education Percent
Less than High School 34.1
High School Grad 22.8
Some College/ Tech School 26.8
4- year Degree 9.8
Advanced Degree 6.5
15
Table 8. Income ( N= 110)
Income Percent
Less than $ 20,000 65.5
$ 20,000- 39,000 26.4
$ 40,000- 59,000 2.7
$ 60,000- 79,000 2.7
$ 80,000- 99,000 0.9
$ 100,000- 199,999 0.9
$ 120,000- 139,999 0.9
Table 9. Household composition ( N= 122)
Who Lives With You Percent
No One 48.4
Spouse 27.9
Other 12.3
Adult Children 6.4
Children 5.7
Caregiver 3.3
Grandchildren 2.5
Table 10. Health status ( N= 117)
Your Health Percent
Poor 7.7
Fair 45.3
Good 37.6
Excellent 9.4
Table 11. Changes in participation of leisure activities over the last two years
( N= 106)
Amount Percent
More than before 27.4
Same as before 41.5
Less than before 31.1
Most of the respondents are still driving, though a substantial number are not ( Table 12).
Most also still own a vehicle, but many do not ( Table 13).
Table 12. Driving status of respondents ( N= 125)
Drive Percent
Yes 59.2
No 40.8
16
Table 13. Vehicle ownership of respondents ( N= 123)
Own Vehicle Percent
Yes 61.0
No 39.0
Those respondents that still have a spouse ( n= 69) indicated that the spouse does not
drive, is retired, and is generally in fair to good health ( Tables 14- 16).
Table 14. Driving status of respondent’s spouse ( N= 69)
Spouse Drive Percent
Yes 44.9
No 55.1
Table 15. Retirement status of spouse ( N= 63)
Spouse Retired Percent
Yes 57.1
No 42.9
Table 16. Health status of spouse ( N= 44)
Health of Spouse Percent
Poor 20.5
Fair 27.3
Good 40.8
Excellent 11.4
Changes in Driving Behavior
More than half of the respondents from senior centers indicated they have reduced the
amount of driving they do in the past two years ( Table 17). Almost a third has stopped
driving all together ( Table 18). They noted that they have changed their driving behavior
in a number of specific ways since getting older ( Table 19). The highest percentage
reported that they avoid driving at night, avoid high traffic times, drive fewer miles,
avoid driving long distances, and avoid driving in bad road conditions. The most
common reason they provided for changes in driving is that they no longer work ( Table
20). They also noted health reasons and the cost being too high. Few mentioned difficulty
handling the car or not trusting their driving ability.
Table 17. Driving reduction ( N= 81)
Reduced Driving Percent
Yes 53.1
No 46.9
17
Table 18. Driving cessation ( N= 49)
Stopped Driving Percent
Yes 32.7
No 67.3
Table 19. Changes in driving habits ( N= 76)
Altered Driving Habits as Gotten Older Percent
Avoid driving at night 29.2
Avoid high traffic times 25.4
Drive fewer miles 23.9
Avoid driving long distances 22.3
Avoid driving in bad road conditions 20.8
Drive fewer days 16.9
Drive less time 16.2
Do not drive during bad weather 16.2
Do not drive in unfamiliar areas 15.5
Avoid driving on busy roads 13.9
Stopped driving altogether 12.3
Avoid driving on Interstates/ Highways 10.0
Never drive at night 9.2
Other 9.2
Table 20. Driving reduction ( N= 79)
Reduced Amount of Driving Percent
No longer work 30.0
Health reasons 19.2
Costs too much 18.5
Someone else drives 11.5
Traffic too hectic 10.8
No vehicle 10.0
Do not trust my ability 6.2
Car is difficult to handle 3.9
Do not need to drive 3.9
Parking is a problem 3.1
18
Daily Trip Behavior
Travel diary respondents were assigned a day for each month of the year. They were
asked to indicate where they went and why they went there for that one day each month.
They were allowed to report from one to four trips out of the house each of those days.
Table 21 shows the most frequent reasons they went out and Table 22 shows the purposes
of those trips.
The most frequent daily destination of respondents is the senior center, obviously an
artifact of the sample that would not emerge with a general population of seniors. This is
followed by trips to a store or grocery store. Dining, traveling, and going to church are
the next most common destinations. The most frequent trip purpose is going out for
meals. This finding is likely more common among the senior center respondent than it
would be among a general group of respondents as many go to the senior center to eat
lunch. This is followed by going out for a variety of social events or meetings, running
errands, and buying food or other shopping.
Table 21. Daily destinations of seniors
Destination Frequency Destination Frequency
Bakery 2 Mortuary 1
Bank 18 Movie 3
Bus 1 No Trips 47
Business 18 Park 40
Camping 1 Pharmacy 13
Casino 2 Polling Place 1
Church 62 Pool 2
Dining 89 Post Office 26
Doctor 49 Rehab Center 1
Errand 7 Residence 68
Farm 1 Salvation Army 7
Food Bank 4 School 7
Gas Station 3 Senior Center 288
Grocery Store 90 Social Event 13
Gym 9 Social Meeting 17
Hospital 16 Store 130
Hotel 2 Tax Office 1
Lab 3 Traveling 76
Library 11 Visiting 2
Lunch 1 Walking 2
Work 9
19
Table 22. Purpose of daily trips
Purpose Frequency Purpose Frequency
Appointment 16 Health 1
Auto, maintenance 5 Holiday 1
Bank 1 Meals 229
Baptism 1 Medical 36
Buy food 93 Medicine 12
Catch bus 1 Oil Change 1
Choir 2 Park 1
Church 4 Pay bills 1
Class/ education/
teaching 8 Post Office 1
Dining 1 Pumpkin 1
Donating 1 Residence 1
Entertainment 36 Rest 1
Errands 103 Shopping 70
Exercising 50 Social event/ meeting 32
Funeral 3 Socializing 140
Garage sales 2 Store 3
Garbage 1 Visiting 14
Get gas 10 Volunteer 24
Grocery store 2 Voting 1
Haircut 8 Work 17
Have fun 2 Worship 26
When seniors leave home, they most often drive their own cars ( Table 23). A distant
second form of transportation is riding with another person. Public transportation is not
used very often. When respondents do have to take alternative forms of transportation,
they usually do not have to pay for the ride ( Table 24). Respondents reported that they
drive anywhere from one to 250 miles during any one trip during the day. The average
number of miles is 15 per trip and the median is about eight miles. They most often leave
home in the morning, either during “ rush hour” or later in the morning and return in early
afternoon ( Tables 25 and 26). It is notable that the seniors in this group rarely are out of
the house at night ( after 7: 00 p. m.)
20
Table 23. Form of transportation used
Transportation Percent
My vehicle that I drove 79.9
Someone drove me in their vehicle 15.8
Senior Center transportation 12.2
Bus 10.1
My vehicle that someone else drove 8.3
Walk 6.8
Other 6.1
Other public transportation 4.0
Dial- a- ride/ VanTran 2.2
Taxi 0.0
Bicycle 0.0
N= 278 trips; respondents were able to select all that apply
Table 24. Pay for the ride
Pay for transportation Percent
Yes 37.0
No 63.0
N= 289
Table 25. Times left house
Travel times Percent
Early morning ( before 7: 00 a. m.) 3.0
Morning rush- hour ( 7: 01 a. m.- 9: 00 a. m.) 35.5
Late morning ( 9: 01 a. m.- noon) 33.6
Afternoon ( noon- 7: 00 p. m.) 26.8
Night ( 7: 01 p. m. on) 1.1
N= 634 trips
Table 26. Times returned to house
Travel times Percent
Early morning ( before 7: 00 a. m.) 1.4
Morning rush- hour ( 7: 01 a. m.- 9: 00 a. m.) 1.0
Late morning ( 9: 01 a. m.- noon) 19.2
Early afternoon ( noon- 4: 00 p. m.) 49.2
Late afternoon ( 4: 01 p. m- 7: 00 p. m.) 21.0
Night ( 7: 01 p. m. on) 8.4
N= 510 trips
21
The reasons respondents do not go out are quite similar to those found in the general
survey ( reported later in this report) as far as rank goes, though they tend to note more
barriers. Usually when respondents did not go somewhere on a particular day, it was
because they did not need to go out ( Table 27). They also noted gas being too expensive
and not feeling well as barriers. They were more likely to indicate they were inhibited by
bad weather, not driving at night, and too much traffic, than were those in the general
population. When weather was an issue, respondents indicated it was too cold in the
winter, or too hot in the summer. “ Other” reasons varied but were usually related to
health issues.
Table 27. Reasons for not going out
Reason Percent
Didn’t need to go anywhere 24.8
Gasoline too expensive 11.8
Not feeling well 11.1
Other 9.2
Bad weather 7.8
Do not drive at night 7.2
Too much traffic 7.2
No one available to drive me 5.9
Unable to leave house due to health problems 5.2
Lack of adequate/ convenient public transportation 3.3
Unreliable vehicle 2.6
Public transportation too expensive 2.0
Poor road conditions 2.0
N= 153 responses
Comments relative to barriers included:
• Costco, I walked, belt broke on air conditioner cost $ 383 to fix, 1/ 2 each way, cab
back.
• We need to go out one form or another to feel better.
• If gas was not so expensive we could solve our problem and feel more satisfied.
• I have had no problems with VanTran program. They are very punctual and
attentive. They all transport us and care for us well.
• I have no problem with services because VanTran is very attentive and all give
good service.
• I think we should solve the problem with help that the price of gas isn't so high for
being able to go out daily to our businesses.
• Lots of traffic Pantano and Broadway-- no one works!!
• My car was in the shop.
• No A/ C in the van, too hot to go anywhere until we get it fixed.
• One day senior center for 2 meals.
22
• Suburban had hit and run damage to left passenger door. Had sub in shop for repairs
8/ 27- 8/ 31 used rental car that time got sub back Fri 8/ 31 everything looks and
works fine.
• Thanks to God, I have no impediments.
• The transportation service is excellent. They provide me very good service. They
always arrive for me at the time I indicate. Thanks for the good service.
Weekly Trip Behavior
Diary respondents were asked a few questions about their weekly travel behavior in
addition to the daily questions. Respondents reported that on a weekly basis, they tend to
go somewhere from zero to 40 times with an average of eight times per week. The types
of places they go are summarized in Table 28. They most often go to the senior center
though this is not typical of seniors in general. They also go to the store or grocery store
quite often, as well as out to eat. The respondents go to the doctor, various events, to visit
friends, to visit family, and to church fairly frequently. They rarely noted encountering
problems with transportation; but when they did they usually indicated that accidents or
traffic are the primary concerns ( Table 29).
Table 28. Weekly destinations
Destination Frequency Destination Frequency
Airport 4 Meetings 18
Bank 24 Nursing home 1
Baseball game 2 Out of town 8
Camp 3 Park 9
Casino 7 Parks and recreation 1
Chamber of commerce 1 Post office 33
Church 48 Recycle 2
Country club 1 Salvation Army 12
Dining 102 School 11
Doctor 90 Senior center 283
Events ( fashion show, zoo,
dances, golf, fishing, pool,
sight seeing, Oct. fest,
concerts, movies, museum)
71 Shuffleboard 1
Exercise 18 Store 121
Food bank 1 VFW 7
Gas station 11 Visit family at work 4
Grocery store 196 Visit family’s house 49
Hair appt. 3 Visit friends 2
Hospital 23 Visit friend's house 59
Insurance 1 Volunteer work 7
Library 10 Work 25
Yard sale 1
23
Table 29. Transportation related problems
Problems encountered Frequency
Accidents on road 8
Almost in an accident 2
Bus route not flexible ( too restrictive) 2
Car in shop 5
Construction 4
Gas prices too high 4
Had to use taxi & too expensive 1
No bus service 2
Surgery ( can't drive) 1
Traffic 7
MAIL SURVEY OF PIMA COUNTY SENIORS
Results from the mail survey are presented in this section. The purpose of the mail survey
was to gather transportation related information from seniors in Pima County.
Respondents live in various zip codes within the Pima County boundaries.
Nature of the Sample – Demographics
The demographics portion of the questionnaire was completed by 760 respondents. The
average age of respondents is 70.4 years old, with 30.9% of respondents being female,
and 69.1% being male. It is important to note that sample gender proportions probably
do not reflect actual gender proportions among the general population given biases in the
names attached to addresses which are more often male. The majority of respondents are
either married or have a partner with whom they live ( Table 30). About 8% of
respondents have adult children living within their households ( Table 31).
Table 30. Gender and age of respondent ( N= 732)
Gender/ age Percent
Female 30.9
Male 69.1
Mean age M= 70.4
24
Table 31. Other members of household ( N= 733)
Household members Percent
Spouse/ partner 63.8
No one 29.9
Adult children 8.3
Other family member 4.1
Children under 18 years old 2.7
Grandchildren under 18 years old 1.9
Other 1.5
Caregiver .4
The following tables provide information about the education level, employment status,
ethnicity and household income of the respondents. Respondents have almost equal
levels of having only a high school education ( 20.1%), some college ( 24.9%), four year
college degree ( 21.1%), and advanced college degree ( 23.7%). A very small number
( 4.4%) received a degree from technical school ( Table 32). The majority are retired
( 71.8%), with 17.5% still employed full- time ( Table 33). The most identified racial or
ethnic group is European American/ White ( 90.3%) ( Table 34). Just over one quarter of
the respondents ( 26.9%) reported earning between $ 20,000 and $ 39,999 annually. One
fifth ( 20%) report earning between $ 40,000 and $ 59,999 annually with the next highest
income level being less than $ 20,000 per year ( 16.7%) ( Table 35).
Table 32. Education level of respondents ( N= 735)
Level of education Percent
Less than high school graduate 5.9
High school graduate 20.1
Some college 24.9
Technical school degree 4.4
Four year college degree 21.1
Advanced college degree 23.7
Table 33. Employment status of respondents ( N= 731)
Employment status Percent
Retired 71.8
Employed full- time 17.5
Employed part- time 9.8
Homemaker 5.2
On disability 5.1
Other 3.0
25
Table 34. Ethnicity/ race of respondents ( N= 729)
Race/ ethnicity Percent
European American/ White 90.3
Hispanic/ Latino 7.7
African American/ Black 1.2
American Indian 1.5
Asian/ Pacific Islander .8
Other .8
Table 35. Annual household income before taxes ( N= 669)
Percent
Less than $ 20,000 16.7
$ 20,000 - $ 39,999 26.9
$ 40,000 - $ 59,999 20.0
$ 60,000 - $ 79,999 14.1
$ 80,000 - $ 99,999 8.4
$ 100,000 or more 13.9
The majority of respondents are still experiencing good health ( 47.8%), or very good
health ( 28.0%), with almost one fifth ( 19.5%) experiencing fair health ( Table 36). Most
( 61.2%) have also been able to maintain the same level of leisure activity participation
over the past couple of years, though somewhat over a quarter report less participation
( Table 37).
Table 36. Current health status of respondent ( N= 738)
Current health Percent
Poor 4.7
Fair 19.5
Good 47.8
Very good 28.0
Table 37. Changes in participation of leisure activities over the last two years
( N= 734)
Amount Percent
More than before 12.0
Same as before 61.2
Less than before 26.8
26
Driving Behavior of Respondents
Most of the respondents of this study ( 94.4%) currently have a driver’s license and
continue to drive ( 91.3%) ( Tables 38 and 39). The majority of those who do not currently
have a driver’s license ( 76.9%) previously had one ( Table 40). Roughly two- thirds
( 65.9%) of respondent households have at least one person who drives with 87.3%
having someone in the household who owns a vehicle ( Tables 41 and 42).
Table 38. Have current driver’s license ( N= 755)
Has license Percent
Yes 94.4
No 5.6
Table 39. Currently drives ( N= 748)
Drive Percent
Yes 91.3
No 8.7
Table 40. Former driver ( N= 65)
Have had license Percent
Yes 76.9
No 23.1
Table 41. At least one other person in household drives ( N= 753)
Someone drives Percent
Yes 65.9
No 34.1
Table 42. Someone in household owns a vehicle ( N= 753)
Someone owns vehicle Percent
Yes 87.3
No 12.7
As they have gotten older, respondents have altered their driving habits in many ways. In
the past two years, 42.3% of respondents reduced the amount of driving they did. Only
8.6% have stopped driving completely in the past two years, showing that the majority of
respondents are still driving ( Tables 43 and 44). Some more specific driving behavior
changes were noted, as well. While 10.1% have stopped driving completely ( includes
more than the past two years), about 24% report driving for less time ( 24.6%) and fewer
2 7
days ( 24.0%) during the week ( Table 45). A large number of respondents report driving
fewer miles per week ( 40.3%), avoiding night driving ( 43%), and avoiding driving during
busy traffic times ( 41.6%). Also see Appendix A for comments.
Table 43. Reduced driving in past two years ( N= 716)
Reduced Percent
Yes 42.3
No 57.7
Table 44. Stopped driving in the past two years ( N= 593)
Stopped Percent
Yes 8.6
No 91.4
Table 45. Altered driving habits with age ( N= 524)
Driving Habit Percent
Avoid driving at night 43.9
Avoid busy traffic times 41.6
Drive fewer miles per week 40.3
Avoid bad road conditions 31.1
Avoid long distances 29.0
Avoid bad weather 27.5
Drive less time during the week 24.6
Drive fewer days during the week 24.0
Avoid unfamiliar areas 21.9
Avoid busy roads 16.8
Avoid interstates/ highways 12.6
Have completely stopped driving 10.1
Never drive at night 6.5
Other 5.2
Of the types of transportation available, most of the respondents ( 89.4%) prefer to drive
themselves, while many ( 34.8%) ride with family or a friend ( Table 46). Very few use
public transportation or other alternative means of transportation.
2 8
Table 46. Type of transportation used ( N= 726)
Mode of transportation Percent
Drive self 89.4
Ride with family or friend 34.8
Walk 9.2
Other 3.0
Use public transportation 2.3
Transportation for disabled 1.4
Taxi 1.4
Senior or community van 1.2
In a typical week, respondents report that they take between zero and 40 trips away from
their residence, with the highest number of trips being four ( 10.7%), five ( 12.6%), seven
( 12.1%) and ten ( 12.4%) ( Table 47). The number of times they drove themselves on
these trips varies between zero and 38 times, with a larger percentage driving themselves
five times ( 12.6%), seven times ( 11.4%), and ten times ( 12%) ( Table 48).
Table 47. Number of trips away from residence to another place during a typical
week ( N= 713)
Number of trips Percent Number of trips Percent
0 0.4 14 3.8
1 3.0 15 4.1
2 3.7 16 0.4
3 6.5 17 0.1
4 10.7 18 1.1
5 12.6 20 4.8
6 9.0 21 1.0
7 12.1 24 0.1
8 3.0 25 1.8
9 1.6 27 0.1
10 12.4 28 0.4
11 0.4 30 1.1
12 4.4 35 0.1
13 0.4 40 0.6
Mean number of trips taken = 8.87
2 9
Table 48. Number of times drove self for trips away from residence during a typical
week ( N= 711)
# drove self Percent # drove self Percent
0 8.7 14 3.5
1 2.6 15 2.7
2 4.8 16 0.1
3 6.2 17 0.6
4 9.0 18 0.6
5 12.6 20 0.1
6 8.5 21 3.3
7 11.4 24 0.4
8 3.8 25 0.3
9 1.2 28 1.3
10 12.0 29 0.4
11 0.7 30 0.1
12 3.2 35 0.7
13 0.6 38 0.1
45 0.1
Mean number of times drove self = 7.61
To get an idea of daily travel patterns, respondents were asked to report on their driving
the day before completing the questionnaire. On the day prior to taking the survey,
respondents reported that they left their residence to go out up to 10 times, with most
taking one trip ( 37.2%), or two trips ( 34.0%) ( Table 49). The majority ( 86.0%) drove
themselves on those trips ( Table 50; also see Appendix A). Of those who didn’t go out
that day, most ( 81.9%) noted the reason they did not take a trip was because they did not
need to go anywhere as opposed to experiencing a barrier of some nature ( Table 51).
Table 49. Number of times participant went out ( N= 711)
# of trips out Percent
0 12.4
1 37.2
2 34.0
3 10.0
4 3.8
5 1.1
6 0.7
7 0.4
9 0.1
10 0.1
Mean M= 1.7
3 0
Table 50. Type of transportation used ( N= 645)
Mode of transportation Percent
Own vehicle, drove self 86.0
Own vehicle, someone else drove 9.1
Passenger in someone else’s vehicle 8.5
Walk 5.0
Bicycle 1.7
Bus 1.1
Van service 0.8
Other 0.8
Taxi 0.5
Other public transportation 0.3
Table 51. Reasons for not going out ( N= 166)
Reason Percent
Didn’t need to go anywhere 81.9
Not feeling well 7.8
Gasoline too expensive 6.6
No one available to drive me 5.4
Unable to leave house due to health problems 5.4
Other 5.4
Do not drive at night 4.2
Lack of adequate/ convenient public transportation 3.0
Unreliable vehicle 2.4
Bad weather 1.8
Public transportation too expensive 0.6
Poor road conditions 0.6
Too much traffic 0.0
If unable to drive in the future, the majority of respondents ( 71.5%) would prefer to ride
with a family member or friend in a private vehicle ( Table 52). Public transportation
( 23.6%) and senior van service ( 29.4%) are much more favorable as a means of
transportation than taxi ( 12.6%). Approximately one- fifth ( 19.7%) of the respondents
believe that walking would be an important form of transportation should they not be able
to drive in the future. A large number, more than a quarter, however, commented that
they do not know how they would get around if unable to drive.
In the two months prior to the survey, the majority of respondents ( 67.5%) did not have a
need to get a ride from someone else ( Table 53). Those who did need to ride with
someone else most often rode with a spouse, son or daughter, neighbor, or friend ( Table
54; Appendix A). Most of the time the respondents felt that it was either no problem, or
just a small problem, to find a ride with someone else. Their biggest concern was feeling
that they didn’t want to depend on others for rides ( Table 55). Quite a large number of
3 1
respondents felt that it would be difficult to reside in their current home if they were no
longer able to drive ( 56%) ( Table 56).
Table 52. Getting around in the future if unable to drive ( N= 720)
Mode of transportation Percent
Ride with family or friend 71.5
Senior van service 29.4
Don’t know 26.7
Public transportation 23.6
Walk 19.7
Taxi 12.6
Other 2.6
Table 53. How often rode with someone else in the last two months ( N= 729)
Frequency Percent
Never 67.5
Once a month 11.0
Twice a week or more 8.4
Twice a month 6.3
Once a week 5.6
Every day 1.2
Table 54. Person rode with when riding with someone else ( N= 630)
Person Percent
Spouse/ partner 49.5
Friend 34.9
Son or daughter 27.3
Neighbor 11.7
Other relative 8.3
Someone else 3.2
Grandchild 2.5
3 2
Table 55. Concerns when getting a ride with someone else ( N= 514)
Concerns
No
problem
%
Small
problem
%
Large
problem
%
Mean*
Don’t like to feel dependent on others 33.5 31.5 35.1 2.0
Worry about imposing on others 43.0 35.8 21.2 1.8
Have to fit into another person’s schedule 45.3 36.9 17.8 1.7
Feel embarrassed asking for a ride 57.8 27.2 15.0 1.6
Don’t know many people willing to help 54.5 28.0 17.5 1.6
Feel obligated to reciprocate 66.9 22.0 11.1 1.4
Concern about person’s driving ability 70.2 24.2 5.6 1.4
Other 82.5 4.8 12.7 1.3
* Mean rating is average of 1 = no problem, 2 = small problem & 3 = large problem
Table 56. Difficult to continue to reside in current home if no longer able to drive
( N= 704)
Difficult Percent
Strongly disagree 14.1
Disagree 30.0
Agree 36.1
Strongly agree 19.9
Perceptions of Transportation in the Community
There is a very high satisfaction rating among respondents regarding the ability to get
around in their community with 47.4% being satisfied and 35.3% being very satisfied
( Table 57). Respondents feel that the quality of transportation available in their
community is fair to good, but their satisfaction with the quality of dependable public
transportation and variety of transportation ranges mostly from very poor to fair ( Table
58).
Table 57. Satisfaction with ability to get around in community ( N= 719)
Satisfaction Percent
Very dissatisfied 7.4
Dissatisfied 9.9
Satisfied 47.4
Very satisfied 35.3
3 3
Table 58. Quality of transportation services in community ( N= 613)
Description
Very
Poor
%
Poor
%
Fair
%
Good
%
Very
Good
%
Mean
Adequate parking provided for
people with disabilities/ health
problems
8.1 11.9 26.3 41.7 12.0 3.4
Able to get to most places wishing to
go 15.7 12.9 22.5 31.6 17.3 3.2
Convenient transportation for people
with disabilities/ health issues 17.1 22.1 33.3 23.0 4.5 2.8
Offering dependable public
transportation 23.4 25.6 29.4 17.7 4.0 2.5
Variety of transportation services 22.8 25.3 31.3 16.6 3.9 2.5
Respondents feel very strongly that driving conditions in their communities could be
greatly improved if cell phone usage while driving was banned ( 72.6%) and road
construction was completed more quickly ( Table 59). They also noted better moving
violation enforcement ( 48.9%) and better highway maintenance ( 49.3%) as desirable
improvements.
Respondents were asked what types of difficulties with driving they have in their own
communities. The majority of respondents feel that the biggest concerns, which are a
small or large problem in their communities, are inconsiderate drivers, dealing with
traffic congestion, that traffic is too hectic, and poor road conditions ( Table 60). With
respect to specific concerns of respondents, they tend to think that potholes are not
repaired in a reasonable amount of time. They are split as to adequate lighting and
readability of signs for night driving ( Table 61). Also see Appendix A.
Table 59. If still driving, recommendations to improve driving conditions in
community or area ( N= 671)
Improvement Percent
Ban cell phone usage 72.6
Speed up road construction improvements 62.0
Better highway maintenance 49.3
Better enforcement of moving violations ( tickets, etc.) 48.9
More reflectors/ paint lines better 41.9
More lighting around signs 31.3
Larger lettering on signs 29.8
More driver education 28.9
More signs/ add road signs where needed 21.0
Improve exit/ entrance ramps 17.4
Reduced speed limit 10.4
Other 9.1
3 4
Table 60. Driving difficulties in community ( N= 679)
Difficulty No
problem
%
Small
problem
%
Large
problem
%
Mean
Inconsiderate drivers 12.4 47.9 39.8 2.3
Dealing with traffic congestion 38.7 44.3 17.0 1.8
Traffic too hectic 35.7 48.8 15.5 1.8
Poor road conditions 33.5 52.1 14.4 1.8
Cost of owning/ operating a car is too much 48.6 38.2 13.2 1.7
Headlight glare from oncoming traffic 43.3 45.4 11.3 1.7
Driving at night 52.2 35.1 12.7 1.6
Parking 61.7 29.3 9.0 1.5
Fear of crime 56.6 35.1 8.2 1.5
Being able to see signals, signs, lane markings 65.6 29.8 4.6 1.4
Narrow lanes 65.2 30.9 3.9 1.4
Driving through construction zones 63.7 31.5 4.9 1.4
Poor weather conditions 61.6 33.3 5.1 1.4
Worried about getting lost 85.8 11.2 3.1 1.2
Entering/ exiting the highway 78.8 18.1 3.1 1.2
Medical/ health difficulties 84.9 11.8 3.4 1.2
Not trusting ability to drive 90.2 8.3 1.5 1.1
Feeling confident about driving 92.8 5.4 1.8 1.1
Difficulty handling car 97.1 2.0 0.9 1.0
3 5
Table 61. Concerns about local traffic, roads and streets, and street signs in
community ( N= 664)
Concern
Strongly
disagree
%
Disagree
%
Not
Sure
%
Agree
%
Strongly
agree
%
Mean
Enough lanes to accommodate
all traffic 47.8 14.8 .2 32.0 5.2 2.3
Potholes repaired in a
reasonable amount of time 22.9 40.9 11.2 21.0 4.1 2.4
Signs confusing 8.0 56.8 14.6 18.7 1.9 2.5
Signs are missing 4.9 39.8 28.5 22.0 4.7 2.8
Street signs are readable at
night 9.4 31.8 13.6 40.1 5.2 3.0
Adequate lighting for night
driving 8.1 31.0 16.6 38.9 5.4 3.0
Traffic moves too fast 7.0 39.2 14.1 31.1 8.7 3.0
Street signs provide advance
warning about upcoming
major intersections
5.5 23.5 17.1 48.7 5.3 3.2
Signs are in locations that
allow enough response time 3.6 25.0 12.1 55.5 3.9 3.3
Signs are large enough to see
from distance 5.7 26.0 7.0 54.4 6.9 3.3
Often traffic delays 3.5 27.6 12.2 44.8 11.9 3.3
Stop signs and traffic signals
are easy to see 2.6 18.0 7.9 65.5 6.0 3.5
Bridges are well maintained 2.6 9.9 24.6 57.1 5.7 3.5
Lane marking are clear 1.6 16.3 8.2 67.7 6.2 3.6
Street signs are easy to
understand 1.5 13.5 7.2 69.9 7.8 3.7
Knowledge and Use of Public Transportation
A large number ( 40.3%) of respondents have no knowledge of public transportation
available in their communities, which correlates with the high percentage that would have
difficulty continuing to reside in their current home should they no longer be able to drive
( Table 62). The majority of respondents ( 95.1%) reported no use of public transportation
in the two months prior to this survey ( Table 63).
The respondents of this survey reported many different problems with public
transportation ( Table 64). Some problems of the highest concern are accessibility
( getting to the stop or station), that the public transportation does not go where they need
to go, it takes too much time, and there is no adequate shelter from the weather while
waiting. In general, the respondents feel that they do not have difficulty in boarding the
3 6
transportation that is available, that they are able to get a seat, that the vehicles are
maintained adequately, and that the cost of public transportation is not too expensive.
Also see Appendix A.
Table 62. Knowledge of public transportation available in community ( not
including taxis) ( N= 719)
Transportation Percent
Yes 59.7
No 40.3
Table 63. Amount of personal public transportation usage in past two months
( N= 728)
Frequency of usage Percent
Every day 0.3
Twice a week or more 0.8
Once a week 0.8
Twice a month 0.8
Once a month 2.2
Never 95.1
Table 64. If public transportation is available, the extent of problems associated
with usage ( N= 561)
Problem
No
problem
%
Small
problem
%
Large
problem
%
Mean
Does not go where needed 21.9 32.4 45.7 2.2
Accessibility ( getting to the stop or station) 31.2 28.0 40.8 2.1
Adequate shelter from the weather while
waiting 23.6 42.5 33.8 2.1
Takes too much time 23.4 39.7 36.9 2.1
Transfers are difficult 41.1 40.6 18.3 1.8
Worried about crime 55.3 31.8 12.9 1.6
Getting information about fares, routes, and
schedules 54.2 35.1 10.8 1.6
Other 65.2 9.1 25.8 1.6
Too expensive 62.0 30.0 7.9 1.5
Difficulty boarding 72.8 18.3 8.9 1.4
Vehicles are poorly maintained 63.5 30.0 6.5 1.4
Being able to get a seat 78.4 16.1 5.4 1.3
3 7
Driving Experience
The majority of respondents who no longer drive have been drivers in the past ( 82.8%),
with more than 50% of them having stopped driving within the last 4 years ( Tables 65
and 66). Only 23.9% have moved to a new residence since they stopped driving but, of
those, most ( 93.0%) cite transportation problems as their reason for moving ( Tables 67
and 68).
Table 65. Respondent was a driver in the past ( N= 93)
Driver in past Percent
Yes 82.8
No 17.2
Table 66. Number of years since stopped driving ( N= 62)
Number of years Percent
less than one year 12.9
1 16.1
2 16.1
3 6.5
4 11.3
5 8.1
6 1.6
7 4.8
8 3.2
10 8.1
12 1.6
19 1.6
20 4.8
21 1.6
46 1.6
Table 67. Moved to new residence since they stopped driving ( N= 67)
Moved Percent
Yes 23.9
No 76.1
Table 68. Transportation problems influenced decision to move ( N= 357)
Problems Percent
Yes 93.0
No 7.0
3 8
Non- drivers noted that problems with transportation most heavily affect going to the
doctor, shopping, and recreation and social activities; although more than 60% feel that
transportation issues are never a problem with any of their trips ( Table 69).
Respondents were asked about certain driving problems and how those problems affected
their decision to stop driving. More than 50% of respondents feel inconsiderate drivers,
night driving, headlight glare from oncoming traffic, that traffic was too hectic, and not
trusting their ability to drive primarily contributed to their decision to stop driving.
Table 69. The extent that transportation problems interfere with specific trips
( N= 145)
Type of trip Never
%
Sometimes
%
Often
% Mean
Doctor 60.0 29.0 11.0 1.5
Visit friends 63.0 22.0 15.0 1.5
Grocery or drug store 63.9 25.6 10.5 1.5
Shopping for non- grocery items 60.7 28.1 11.1 1.5
Recreation activities ( movies, sports) 60.9 27.3 11.7 1.5
Visit family 70.1 17.3 12.6 1.4
Place of worship 71.2 17.8 11.0 1.4
Social activities 66.1 23.6 10.2 1.4
Volunteer activities 70.8 16.8 12.4 1.4
Other 76.7 10.0 13.3 1.4
Work or school related 81.4 6.9 11.8 1.3
3 9
Table 70. Effect the following problems had on the decision to stop driving ( N= 128)
Problems
No
problem
%
Small
Problem
%
Large
Problem
%
Mean
Inconsiderate drivers 26.1 42.9 31.1 2.1
Driving at night 34.8 33.9 31.3 2.0
Headlight glare from oncoming traffic 35.7 40.0 24.3 1.9
Traffic too hectic 39.5 36.0 24.6 1.9
Not trusting ability to drive 46.3 28.9 24.8 1.8
Dealing with traffic congestion 50.0 26.7 23.3 1.7
Poor road conditions 41.2 43.9 14.9 1.7
Feeling confident about driving 55.6 19.7 24.8 1.7
Poor weather conditions 46.2 37.6 16.2 1.7
Medical or health difficulties 51.6 24.6 23.8 1.7
Ability to see signals, signs and lane
markings 53.9 27.8 18.3 1.6
Narrow lanes 55.8 33.6 10.6 1.6
Parking 58.1 29.1 12.8 1.6
Cost of owning/ operating vehicle too much 60.9 28.9 10.2 1.5
Entering or exiting the highway 60.9 24.3 14.8 1.5
Driving through construction zones 65.8 23.1 11.1 1.5
Fear of crime 56.5 33.9 9.6 1.5
Worried about getting lost 73.3 14.7 12.1 1.4
Difficulty handling vehicle 70.2 17.5 12.3 1.4
4 0
4 1
IV. CONCLUSIONS
A number of significant facts emerged from the research.
1. Data show that those seniors we surveyed at the senior centers are more at risk of
being isolated and unable to access community services than the seniors we
surveyed through the mailed survey.
􀂃 Senior center attendees are slightly older ( 73 years vs. 70 years).
􀂃 The educational level of center attendees is lower with 56.9% of them having
less than a college degree compared to 26% of the general population.
􀂃 48% of the attendees live alone compared to 29% of all seniors, and 66% have
an annual income of less than $ 20,000 as compared to 16% of all seniors in
the study.
􀂃 53% of senior center attendees rate their health as “ fair” or “ poor” compared
to 24% of others in the study.
􀂃 Of the seniors in the senior centers who participated in the study, 48% live
alone compared to 30% in the mail survey sample.
􀂃 A much higher percentage of senior center attendees do not drive and do not
own a vehicle relative to the mail survey group.
􀂃 A somewhat higher percentage of those at the senior centers have reduced
driving in the past two years and a much larger percentage have stopped
driving in the past two years than the general population of Pima County
seniors..
Because of the lower socio- economic status of the senior center sample, there is
evidence those who are not as well off economically and those who are older are
likely to experience greater transportation related problems than seniors with
more resources. This finding is consistent with the research reviewed in Section
II.
2. Seniors are responsible for most of their own transportation needs.
􀂃 Seniors make an average of 8.87 trips a week, or an average of one a day. For
almost 90% of those trips seniors report driving themselves.
􀂃 Less than 5% of seniors interviewed use any type of public or senior/ disabled
transportation services.
3. At the same time, seniors’ driving habits are changing.
􀂃 53% of senior center attendees and 42% of mail survey respondents report
driving less in the past 2 years.
Though self- reliance is likely desirable, older seniors will need transportation
alternatives as they reduce and, ultimately, stop driving.
4 2
4. Seniors need more transportation options to stay active and involved. The vast
majority of the “ trips” they make on a daily/ weekly basis are for social events, to
do “ errands,” or go to church. Several of the study’s findings suggest their ability
to continue to be active and to maintain a fulfilling lifestyle is harmed by lack of
transportation.
􀂃 Seniors who are “ mobility impaired” feel that public transportation is not
usable because of their special needs, or long waits, or they live in areas where
these services are not available.
􀂃 31 % of diary respondents and 27% of mail survey respondents cited less
participation in leisure activities in the past two years.
􀂃 56% feel that it would be difficult to remain in their current home if they are
no longer able to drive.
􀂃 24% have moved into a new residence since they stopped driving.
Research demonstrates that active and involved seniors are more likely to retain
their physical and mental health. Thus, transportation alternatives are needed to
help them maintain involvement for their personal, as well as societal, well- being.
5. While 71% of the mail survey respondents would prefer a friend or family member
to drive when they cannot, the 48% of seniors who live alone and the 29% with
limited family and social networks, may have limited options. This could
disproportionately affect those who have relocated to the area upon retirement.
6. Forty percent of respondents have no knowledge of public transportation services
available in their communities. Those who do know about it rarely use it primarily
because they feel it does not go where needed, is not accessible, there is
inadequate shelter from the weather while waiting, and it takes too much time.
The lack of knowledge and use of public transportation is a concern as this is
clearly an option for seniors who are no longer able to drive but are still mobile
enough to do some walking.
7. Seniors feel that improving the quality of transportation services in the community
will involve more dependable transportation ( 49%) and having a variety of
options for transportation services ( 48%).
4 3
V. RECOMMENDATIONS
1. While seniors who are currently using senior centers are actively involved, the
fact that they have more risk factors will require that programs and services be
more proactive in keeping them engaged in the community. Planners will likely
need to work with health care and in- home service providers as well as
community- based service providers.
2. While the vast majority of seniors are still driving, other resources will be
required as more and more of them are unable to operate a motor vehicle safely.
And since the majority of seniors do not currently know of, and/ or use public
transportation, a significant effort will need to be put into outreach and public
education regarding transportation alternatives when driving is no longer an
option.
3. Since many seniors are voluntarily cutting back on their driving, community
organizations, businesses, and churches should be encouraged to support
alternative transportation options to keep seniors involved.
4. More housing options for seniors need to be developed that are near medical and
shopping services so that seniors have greater access.
4 4
4 5
APPENDIX A: OPEN ENDED RESPONSES
4 6
4 7
Comments about driving behavior changes:
• Don't drive at night as much as I used to. Don't drive as many miles in a day as I used to.
• I drive more, time and distance.
• I have not changed my driving habits.
• I let my companion drive more when going to the same place.
• I only go 2 or 3 miles in home area.
• I periodically read the drivers handbook to know the laws.
• I try to make only right turns.
• Nothing changed.
Alternatives to driving:
• Bicycle
• Change residence to one closer to where I need to go.
• Hire a driver.
• Pay someone to drive.
• We need more info & better public transportation
Public transportation comments:
• I live about 7 miles from any public transportation.
• No public transportation in our area.
Other forms of transportation
• A co- worker ( 4)
• Parents - ages 87 and 85.
• Some locals will take you sometimes for gas & for $ 50 to the city for doctors.
• Someone else: taxi or shuttle
Riding with others:
• Anyone expects you to pay for gas and sodas and food and $ 50 too. Too expensive.
• Friends share rides when we go out. Don't depend on any one.
• I have no vehicle at the moment
• It would hurt her feelings if I declined her carpool once a month to our club meeting
• Never need to ask.
• This isn't a current issue
• We always ride with spouse/ partner
• We trade off, take turns
Suggestions for transportation improvements:
• 1. Many drivers seem ignorant of the " rules of the road". How about a " rule of the day" in the
local newspaper? 2. Enforce speed limits. Autos that pass me at 20- 50 percent over the limits
often plug the next intersection when I reach it as the light turns green. It will reduce congestion!
• A light rail system between Tucson and Phoenix.
• Advance signs warning of double right turn lanes.
• Better maintenance of neighborhood streets.
• Better screening of 65+ drivers
• Bus pullouts and right turn lanes
• Bus ramps for stops to let cars by.
• Carpool lanes in Seattle are enforced 6 a. m. to 9 p. m. Other drivers encouraged to call &
report cheaters.
• Clear trees and brush around signs
• Connect Syder Road
• Crack down on aggressive drivers.
• Cross town freeway.
4 8
• Do not close all highway exits!!!!!
• East/ west and north/ south freeways.
• Enforce laws. Also, drivers use or stay in left lane. Bicycle lane below the posted limit.
• Enforce penalties for running lights at intersections.
• Enforce speed limits!
• Enforce turns on green arrows only.
• Get rid of bullshit circles in intersections.
• I don't like reflector bumps. Good paint - yes. Other states don't use reflector bumps
• Keeping tire debris off highway.
• Larger street signs!
• Left on arrow only at First and River Rd.
• Limit entrance ramps in downtown area.
• Limit growth.
• Long wait at RR crossing
• Make lights consistent, e. g. leading green arrow.
• Make road construction crews move signs when not applicable. Example: " R/ H. lane closed
ahead" at 9: 00 in the morning: true. Since I pay attention to these signs, having seen the
need to move to the next lane, I do. Now is 2: 00 in the afternoon, the sign still there I again
move over, but R/ H lane no longer blocked do to others who pay no attention to signs, I can't
make a right turn where I need to. I feel I want to strangle some one.
• Make signs easier to understand & give more advanced notice for necessary lane changes
• Mandatory driver's test for the elderly.
• More aviation type roads.
• More left turn lights.
• More public transportation.
• More right turn lanes @ intersections.
• Need a cross town freeway.
• Need some cross town freeways.
• No passing zones & speed humps.
• Prohibit U- turns at ALL major intersections that have traffic signals.
• Red light runners. People drive faster in town then on I- 10.
• Road signs ( sheet) placed on dividers before street, i. e. Roller Coaster Rd. placement.
• Ticket slow drivers as well as speeders.
• Too many fatalities from excess speed! Needs reduced.
• Trim shrub/ plants back at corners to view oncoming traffic better
• Turn stoplights to flashing red during night hours ( 6 pm to 7 am).
Community transportation problems:
• After construction street signs take too long to replace.
• Have a sign indicating the next main cross street placed one block before the intersection to
allow cars to get into the correct lane to make a turn.
• Houghton in Tucson should have been planned for a four lane divided highway and the right
of way established long ago. Stupid lack of planning and foresight at A. D. O. T. Complicated
over kill at some bridges, as at Duval on I- 19.
• In general, Tucson roads were built for a less populated community.
• Interstate 10 should be diverted north- west of Tucson toward San Manuel, down the San
Pedro Valley and hook up to existing I- 10.
• There are many speeders ( excessive) on the road.
• Traffic moves too fast. I agreed with this but not because speed limits are too high, they're not.
• Tucson planning has allowed much too much outlying development without considering
impact of increased traffic. However, increasing traffic lanes just seems to encourage more
development. Look at Phoenix for a terrible example.
4 9
• Turn signals should all be same - not some leading left turn, etc. It confuses all drivers.
Crosswalk lights should all operate the same, i. e. all stop on red - not have flashing lights.
Public transportation issues:
• Bus doesn't run on Romero anymore
• Not on time and take a very long time
Public transportation use:
• Don't have any info. on public transp. It would be very helpful to have info that CLEARLY
AND SIMPLY explains availability, cost, schedules & #' s of such services
• I only use it to return home from jury duty.
Other public transportation concerns:
• Availability.
• Have never used any public transportation.
• Haven't had a need. Don't know the answers. I would call my son.
• I do not have buses close to my house.
• I'm asthmatic so doubt that I could breathe well on a bus.
• I'm near 90 and very ill and cannot go anywhere without personal care and help.
• My home in Ajo is 100 miles from Casa Grande, 120 from Phoenix & 130 from Tucson.
Every month I have to see a Dr. in one of these places.
• No buses run by us. Nearest is about 5 miles away.
• Not enough north/ south routes.
• Summer heat deters me from walking to and waiting at bus stop.
• The nearest bus stop is 2 miles away. I live outside city limits.
• Times of day that I would need transportation.
• Unreliable - took bus 3 times to work. Was late each time.
Other comments:
• 1. Cameras at major traffic intersections please. 2. Enforce carpool lanes. 3. Increase
carpool lane 55 mph mandatory speed limit. 5. More separate bike lanes. 6. Complete
bike/ walk paths along Santa Cruz River.
• 1. Generally speaking, the whole country needs better driver’s education. Not just Tucson,
or the state of Arizona. 2. We need better drivers license testing. Who gives a hoot if you
can parallel park? It should be can you enter and exit I- 10 properly! When pulling on to I- 10
and you slow down on the on ramp instead of picking up speed to match the traffic you are
merging with, you are stupid and dangerous. 3. All the idiots who can't call their friends
before leaving home or work and just have to use a cell phone are dangerous.
• 1. Improved public transportation with a variety of alternatives allowing access to more
locations throughout the Tucson area should be a priority. 2. Road repair and maintenance
are severely lacking in Tucson.
• 1. Need more left turn arrows. 2. Left turn at beginning of green light. 3. Advance warning
street sign of all major intersections ( city and county). 4. New street sign put up after major
construction ( River & Dodge missing).
• 1. Sun Tran bus, no service on River Rd. to Oracle Rd. Need the # 15 buses to run Stone to
River and east on River Rd. to Campbell Ave. and then south to UA Mall. 2. Weekend
service from east side to west side. Also, last bus home is at 6: 45 p. m.
• A birth certificate is no true indicator of a person's age. Most people guess me to be 55 or 60
- because of my attitude about life. Use it or lose it just about covers everything, including
mind and body. Street conditions on the NW side are terrible, especially between Miracle
Mile and Wetmore Road, between Oracle & Romero Rd causing more trips to the front end
alignment.
• A light rail system between Tucson and Phoenix would be great. HG 86 needs to be widened
with all the building west of Tucson, including the Tohono O'odham Reservation.
5 0
• After 60 years of driving the U. S, I received my first ticket, failure to yield, because a biker ran
into my rear bumper. I went to driving school. What a joke. The young instructor was very
humorous and witty, but taught me nothing about safe driving. Nothing about the psychology
or dangers of today's fast moving society. I'm 78 years old. I hate to waste 5 hours of my life
listening to drivel.
• Ajo Transportation, owned by Kathy Boyd, is doing the best job they can to keep Ajo citizens
mobile in Ajo and Why. They also have regular trips to Phoenix & Tucson ( but none to Casa
Grande). This allows people to get to their Dr. and to do some big city shopping. The main
problem making it difficult to us their services for more general purposes is connecting with
other transportation systems so that one can get to the airport, at the zoo or visit friends
and/ or relatives. A brochure, web site,, telephone consultant or some other educational
device is needed to help people move about from the need of the line in Phoenix and Tucson.
• Any person caught driving while using a cell phone should get 10 years in a foreign prison.
• As I do not need to use public transportation yet, it is difficult to judge ease of using. I don't
have bus schedules nor a need to keep them handy. I do know there is a bus stop about a
quarter of a mile or less from my house, but do not know routes.
• At license renewal time, we are not even asked if we would like a driver's handbook. What
kind of " education" is that? How about a periodic public service announcement series on
local radio by the DPS - Highway patrol ( or equiv.) on tail gating, safety belts, stopping
distances, highway object avoidance maneuvers, moving left for emergency vehicles on side
of road, rear view mirror setting for best vision, when passing do not return to lane until you
see both head lamps in overhead mirror, stop behind limit line at intersections because that
person on your right, turning right, needs to see to your left. In short, help people to be more
courteous! It will reduce road rage.
• Bus stop on Kolb Speedway ( southwest corner) needs a screen for protection. Cooler would
be better.
• City streets in Tucson need to be improved ( bumps, road noise, holes, broken out pavement).
High traffic roads, such as Sabino Canyon, where speeds are excessive and noise levels in
the neighborhoods are high. Motorists' autos with one tail light out is a common occurrence.
I see at least two on each trip locally to store, post office, etc. Intersection at Tanque Verde
and Sabino Canyon road, need larger sign for no 180 degree turn for cars going east on
Tanque Verde.
• Closing a freeway for 3 years to add one lane in each direction. Who planned this? The 3
Stooges?
• Elderly driving in Green Valley is a hazard. Mandatory driver's tests for those over 55 is
warranted.
• For the elderly and the disabled, information access for transportation needs to be kept
simple.
• Houghton Road widening should be expedited. At times it takes much time to exit our
housing development. A right turn is difficult and a left turn nearly impossible.
• I am temporarily using a disability parking permit due to an injury. There is no place for me to
park close to my place of employment downtown. There is one handicapped parking special
permit space near, but it has been assigned to someone. I called city transportation to no
avail. It's a BIG problem for me getting into my work place on crutches. I work at Broadway
and Scott.
• I applied to Van Tran - Tucson city disability transportation. I DID NOT QUALIFY. I have had
and have: 13 brain tumors, pacemaker, thyroid disease, herniated disc, stenosis. I am
unable to walk very far. I live in constant pain. In order to qualify they wanted me to go to
their physical therapists. WHY? What would they know of my diseases. I am also partially
blind. I need say no more!
• I can't understand why Tucson hesitates on street cameras. We see red light runners several
times a day. We live directly north of Fry's in Crossroads Festival. Their northern most exit is
for semi trucks only. Drivers of passenger cars use it all the time. It is so dangerous when
we attempt to enter our complex.
5 1
• I didn't mind filling this out, however, these questions did not apply to me for I drive all the
time. That's part of my income. I find driving to be relaxing.
• I do not drive. Do not own a car. Need busses to malls and stores.
• I feel there should be officers of the law on the road patrolling the flow of traffic and stop the
use of cell phones on the road. I drive defensively for my safety, but I have had numerous
incidents when someone on a cell phone in the car almost hit me. If police officers cannot
patrol, there should be helicopters in the air to monitor potential dangerous drivers and
situations. A course of Drivers Education in high school for teens and defensive driving
would be a great asset for young and elderly drivers alike. I had a defensive driving course
by my police dept. in NJ while a volunteer on the ambulance as an EMT. I use this training
daily.
• I have a sister who is disabled and low income. She has been denied transportation by Van
Tran because of income level. Her income is barely enough to meet her basic needs. It
would seem that disability should play a more important role than income.
• I have looked into bus service, though I don't need to catch a bus. Nearest bus stop is 2
miles away. Routes are inconvenient to get to nearby stores, downtown & to where I work
( near airport). If I had to rely on buses I would have a serious problem! Some roads also do
not go through very safe areas.
• I have no knowledge of public transportation in my area. Busses would not be an option for
the elderly or infirm in many areas of suburban Tucson because of extreme heat, lack of
sidewalks, shelter, etc. Any realistic public transport would have to be on a pick- up basis.
• I hope this survey helps create concrete solutions and better transportation in Pima County. I
think we need to think about putting mass transit in place sooner than later like an EL or a
Metro system.
• I live in Green Valley where most people travel by their private cars. There is a large number
of elderly drivers who have a difficult transportation problem.
• I resent closing the freeway ramps for 3 years!! It should be done in stages. Dummies.
• I sometimes think about these problems: car jacking, inconsiderate drivers ( we have a lot of
them), road rage. We need more police officers on our streets day and night.
• I think I may be the exception to the rule - 85 year old people should be " with one foot in the
grave", but I am extremely healthy and very self sufficient.
• I think it would be useful to include refresher information on driving and safety tips - being
alert, no phones, pay attention to driving.
• I understand the importance of this survey, but since you are sending it out to people under
70, I recommend your group attend some sensitivity training and additional education
concerning senior citizens. The majority of today's seniors are very active and resent
questions like this survey. My wife and I play tennis 3 times a week and travel frequently.
However, I tried to answer so the survey will provide information that helps. When we can't
drive, we will have to move because public transportation is not available.
• I was born and raised in L. A. I witnessed the growth of traffic and construction of freeways.
As you can see, the condition of roads and construction of freeways did not help much.
Reason: the focus is on moving CARS, not PEOPLE. Pima County is clearly heading in that
same direction. Innovative thinkers must focus on moving PEOPLE not CARS. The idea of a
light rail system must be considered in the thought process. Like it or not, traffic growth is
upon us. San Francisco built the Bart System to move people into and out of the city. I
suggest Pima County take a good hard look at it.
• I would like to get to downtown Tucson for museums, convention center, etc., but I don't drive
because of the traffic, one- way streets and lack of parking. It would be nice to have a van or
a bus that ran every hour. There could be a fare which would make the service profitable.
• I would love to see public transportation so good and pollution free that we could virtually ban
private care use in Tucson. I think building more roads and widening streets is a band aide
solution that won't resolve the traffic problem.
• I would rather you call me @ 520- 387- 7823. It is easier for me to speak as opposed to
writing. I am aware of small things that make a big difference if something could be done to
improve it.
5 2
• I- 10 is the only major artery between Tucson and Phoenix and is very heavy with truck traffic;
something needs to be done about this. Tucson needs some crosstown freeway, traffic has
increased by leaps and bounds in the past few years and need some crosstown freeways.
• If law enforcement would enforce laws regarding " inattentive" drivers, i. e. eating, primping,
text messaging, telephones, etc., the traffic would be much safer. Also drivers, including 18
wheelers, who travel in the left lane and do not move over are an absolute disaster on I- 10.
Cops are the biggest problems on I- 10. They are arrogant, rude and jerks.
• If the speeders and red light and stop sign blowers were ticketed, especially the speeders,
Tucson could pave it's streets in gold.
• Important question not asked: How much do you drive ( in miles) annually.
• In general I find driving here a pleasure, but some road signs are not clear and I can see how
senior drivers may become confused and turn incorrectly, thus becoming lost.
• In my younger years, we were in the trucking business in the northern states. I have driven
trucks and I consider myself better than average driver and especially for my age. Divorced
at age 38, I have driven many, many miles by myself and no accidents or tickets.
• In regard to # 30 question, it is not a problem as yet, but my first consideration is " not trusting
my ability to drive". I will stop driving then.
• Issues involving construction of new homes are causing huge traffic problems in the
unincorporated parts of Tucson. Contractors should be required to widen roads and place
traffic signals around new housing complexes
• It is totally outrageous the length of time construction takes in Tucson. Most of those road
crews take more breaks than work. Cortaro and I- 10 - and just Cortaro is a good example.
They have screwed with that road since I moved here in 2001 and it just got finished.
Freeway on and exits on 6/ 15/ 07 to be closed for 3 years. Who are you people kidding?
They won't be done for 5 years. I for one plan to get out of Arizona next year and I'll never
come back. Tucson is where Phoenix was in 1986 when we left Arizona that time. They
won't stop growth here. I want no part of it. Someone needs to ask where Arizona will find
water in 20 years. There will be none.
• It might be a good idea not to do repairs of roads in the same area running the same ways.
Late spring for example - repair on Sunrise going both ways from Pantano to Campbell and
also decide to finish to final black top on River Road. There are more examples of this
happening around the city.
• It seems that ADOT & city & county do not work together on many matters. Law enforcement
in city and county does not enforce laws pertaining to big rigs on city streets, and the trucks
with large tires up high for tire flaps & headlights. It has cost my family 5 windshields & these
fools texting while they drive.
• Just to let you know that I resented the fact that you consider me old at 59. I would feel old
hopefully later in life and when I know I'm starting to have driving problems. Have been in
Arizona seven years now and have no problems driving - matter of fact have had no ticket in
34 years and health/ vision reaction time is still good. License doesn't expire until 2013, so
send me another form when the state considers me old and need yearly renewals.
• Lack of pull out lanes for buses on newly constructed road.
• Mandatory insurance creates unacceptable burden on working poor. If state dictates this
obligation, then the state needs to make available a set yearly fee ( minimum) within the reach
of the worker that has to drive to work to be a productive citizen in our society. Public
transportation is inadequate to meet this need. We do not need a class system in Arizona
where the rich drive and the poor walk.
• Most of our driving is on a Harley. Enforcing the current traffic laws would be nice.
• My eyes are not too bad, but larger street name signs would really help me. I compensate by
using a map or getting a computer map before I depart.
• My main concern while driving in our area is the number of people using cell phones & the
red light racers. In the 2 years since we permanently retired to the area, we have come close
to being hit no less than six times by folks trying to beat red lights or pre- occupied with phone
use.
5 3
• My wife is 80 years old and I have a Downs syndrome daughter who depends on us for
transportation.
• Need a cross town freeway in Tucson. Tucson Foothills does not get its fair share of motor
fuel tax revenues since it is an unincorporated area. I like the idea of a truck route that
bypasses Phoenix and Tucson. Need a law to keep trucks in the right lane on highways.
• Need more public transportation into neighborhoods where old folks don't have to walk so far
with groceries or shopping. I'm a walker, but not when I'm loaded down with groceries.
• Never put chip seal on any road. Loose, flying gravel is dangerous. Could easily destroy an
eye when walking my dog along a road. It did ruin my Ford Bronco windshield. Road
projects take forever, many very poorly designed with poor quality that soon needs repairs.
The concept of drainage seems beyond the mentality of road builders here. Much waste and
inefficiency. In Green Valley, completing the E. Frontage road south of Continental was
planned in the 1970' s and hasn't happened yet. An interchange is badly needed on the 4+
mile distance between Continental and Canoa. On I- 19 on the Indian Reservation there is a
full interchange that is useless - no roads there. We need engineers with brains that know
how to build a decent road, quickly and do it right. Closing the exits on I- 10 in downtown
Tucson for 3 years is simply intolerable.
• No buses in my area. Would need more van type transportation.
• On major streets you should place a sign indicating the next major intersection/ cross street
name so a driver has time to get into the proper lane to make a turn. Not everyone knows
the city like a cab driver. This would improve the traffic flow at busy intersections.
• People over 65 need to be retested more often. Example: 65- 70 written and driving - every 2
years, 70 and up - written and driving annually. There should be some kind of reflex test
( reaction time), more frequent and tougher eye tests. THERE ARE OLDER PEOPLE OUT
THERE WHO SHOULD NOT BE DRIVING.
• Please get the people in Arizona to use their signal lights!!
• Plentiful, flexible, public transportation available at most hours would greatly improve quality
of life in general in Tucson and give me more confidence about my independence as I
become older.
• Questions unanswered do not apply to me. Also, I have never used the bus or other public
transportation, so some answers are speculative. I did not answer question 40, as I could not
see its relevancy.
• Red light runners are a big problem! Northwest side is growing faster than the roads can
handle.
• Set up mechanism to allow people who are forced to stop driving to identify themselves and
their transportation need for planning on how best to support their needs. Stop those who
misuse emergency services for routine transportation needs just because it's free. Provide
emergency transportation and require them to use appropriate services when needed.
Support local churches in providing bus transportation for members who do not have
transportation to and/ or from church.
• Should do check points occasionally for drivers license and insurance eligibility.
• Since there are no freeways ( to speak of) to get around Tucson, all major N/ S or E/ W
thoroughfares need to be 3 lanes each direction, minimum, with adequate left and right turn
lanes. All lights should monitor to detect traffic flow or lack thereof.
• Stop red light runners, larger lettering on local street signs.
• Street lighting in Tucson is not great, but probably as good as can be, while allowing
reasonable dark sky for nearby observatories. Road signage is generally good. My only
complaint is that some street name signs are either poorly sited or poorly lit, making them
difficult to see far enough away. It seems that unrestrained development will result in a race
to see which will make Tucson unlivable first: run out of water or run out of infrastructure,
particularly roads. For goodness sake, speed up road improvement projects. Not more
projects, just finish them faster.
• Street signs should be larger and/ or farther from the intersection, providing more reaction
time.
5 4
• Take a lesson from: Washington, Oregon, California, Ohio, Indiana and others and stop
incompetent contractors from taking two or more years to complete a road improvement that
would take six months or less to complete.
• The city and country are lax in enforcing traffic laws. What can we expect when the LEO's
don't observe the laws themselves. It is a rare day when you see patrol cars observing the
speed limit and red lights. I wonder how many people are injured each year just because the
traffic laws are not enforced?
• The lighting is non- existent on the east side of Town Pass Kolh. Speedway needs widening
past " Como Seco"?. Except for some pot holes, Tucson is pretty good.
• The road construction is ridiculous! Roads are down to one lane and there are no workers to
be seen… All this will keep visitors from coming to Tucson- meaning everyone will lose
money, except for the construction companies involved.
• There is a need for more street lights and sidewalks. In some places without sidewalks and
without lighting, pedestrians are very much at risk at night.
• There is no public transportation where I live. Roads are in TERRIBLE shape - pot holes are
NEVER filled. After one storm, a road was torn up, and when the transportation dept. fixed it
the road was even worse. They should have been made to come back and do the job
correctly. Over all - the transportation system for the East side and south east side of Tucson
is HORRIBLE. Not even available for most people. For now, we can drive our cars, but the
day may come when we'll have to sell our houses and move to a Senior Home just because
of lack of transportation and other services. Living here ( zip 85641) is not for the faint of
heart.
• This study is aimed at persons living within the city of Tucson. I live in the Catalina Foothills
and taxis would be about the only alternative to driving myself. That would be cost prohibitive
so I would probably have to relocate if I could no longer drive and my wife could no longer
drive.
• This survey looks like a disguised justification to spend more tax- payer money on public
transportation. Please count my votes!
• Ticket and pull drivers off the highway who are going way too slow.
• Too many wild drivers. Too many drivers using cell phones!
• Traffic lights in and around Tucson are confusing. Some have a leading green arrow, some
do not. Some have the left turn arrow come on, even when there are no cars present waiting
to turn. Others turn immediately red when there are no card waiting. I've even seen some
lights that have a short delay ( 5 seconds or so) before the green left turn arrow comes on.
This last one is aggravating because cars hesitate because they aren't sure if the arrow will
come on. Can you just make the lights consistent?
• Travel mainly by Van Tran
• Try to get more police men and women in the force to cut down on the speeders. They are
all over worked and under paid now, but with speeding tickets they could get more help and
better pay.
• Tucson has had major traffic problems for many years. We do not have enough parkways to
reduce the traffic on major arteries, i. e. Speedway, Broadway, 22nd Street. We need major
improvements to accommodate the growth of the city and the number of cars using our city
streets. The last bond election which finally passed may be solution though definitely much
delayed.
• Tucson needs a monorail system with all the large medians E & W. An above ground would
cost less and make more sense; with an E. W. and N. S. system more people could be
moved faster. Look at Disneyland. It was built in 1958 and still running strong.
• Tucson still needs freeways. Most problems are: cell phone users, red light runners, stop
and go - no freeways, not enough lanes for amount of traffic, roads in bad shape, rude, rude
drivers!
• We are very concerned about the safety of our roads and streets. It appears traffic has little
or no regulation perhaps because of the lack of law enforcement of our police - that are too
few for the number of vehicles on our streets and roads.
5 5
• We just moved here in Dec. 05. We love the area but I have never seen so many rude and
inconsiderate drivers. I truly believe that most do not understand traffic laws - especially
when making left turns.
• We live near I- 19, there have been a few accidents that have ended on frontage roads or
near homes. Think that better fences, guard rails or some other protection maybe needed
along some of the housing areas.
• We need a bus at least a couple of times a day in my neighborhood. My wife works so I have
no way to my Dr. or the stores. I am blind, but I can still take the bus.
• We need small size buses running north and south ( not the regular ones), then regular size
buses running east and west.
• We really do need reliable, convenient and relatively rapid public transportation in Tucson.
Let's get ahead of the rest of the southwest in that one.
• Weekend Rocky Point traffic is bad - tailgating, passing on right side, passing at
intersections, speeding.
• When I'm in town, can't wait to leave because of the traffic, lights and roads.
• Why is it, the State of AZ has to wait so many years before they decide to do something. It is
like other issues in any state. You wait so long & there is no fixing the problem.
• Wish public transportation was quick and convenient so I didn't have to drive so often.
• Would use bus if it came down Houghton. Nothing even close to go to mall, grocery store,
etc.
5 6
5 7
REFERENCES
Adler, Geri, and Susan Rottunda. 2006. " Older Adults' Perspectives on Driving
Cessation." Journal of Aging Studies 20 ( 3): 227- 235.
Alsnih, Rahaf, and David A. Hensher. 2003. " The Mobility and Accessibility
Expectations of Seniors in an Aging Population." Transportation Research Part A:
Policy and Practice 37 ( 10): 903- 916.
Bauer, Mary J., Susan Rottunda and Geri Adler. 2003. " Older Women and Driving
Cessation." Qualitative Social Work 2 ( 3): 309- 325.
Burns, Peter C. 1999. " Navigation and Mobility of Older Drivers." Journals of
Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences 54B ( 1): S49- 55.
Carp, Frances M. 1988. “ Significance of Mobility for the Well- Being of the Elderly.” In
Transportation in an Aging Society: Improving Mobility and Safety for Older Persons –
Volume 2: Technical Papers. 1- 20. Special Report no. 218. Washington, D. C.:
Transportation Research Board.
Collia, Demetra V., Joy Sharp and Lee Giesbrecht. 2003. " The 2001 National Household
Travel Survey: A Look into the Travel Patterns of Older Americans." Journal of Safety
Research 34 ( 4): 461- 470.
Coughlin, Joseph. 2001. Transportation and Older Persons: Perceptions and
Preferences. Washington, D. C.: AARP.
Dellinger, Ann M., et al., 2001. " Driving Cessation: What Older Former Drivers Tell
Us." Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 49 ( 4): 431- 435.
Gallo, Joseph J., George W. Rebok and Sandra E. Lesikar. 1999. " The Driving Habits of
Adults Aged 60 Years and Older." Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 47
( 3): 335- 341.
Gebers, Michael A., and Raymond C. Peck. 1992. " The Identification of High- Risk Older
Drivers through Age- Mediated Point Systems." Journal of Safety Research 23 ( 2): 81- 93.
Glasgow, Nina, and Robin M. Blakely. 2000. " Older Nonmetropolitan Residents'
Evaluations of their Transportation Arrangements." The Journal of Applied Gerontology
19 ( 1): 95- 116.
Hakamies- Blomqvist, Liisa. 2006. " Are there Safe and Unsafe Drivers?" Transportation
Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 9 ( 5): 347- 352.
Hensher, David A., and April J. Reyes. 2000. " Trip Chaining as a Barrier to the
Propensity to use Public Transport." Transportation 27 ( 4): 341- 361.
5 8
Hermanson, Sharon. 2005. Older Car Owners: The Use of Their Cars by Others. Data
Digest no. 124. Washington, D. C.: AARP. http:// www. aarp. org/ research/ housing-mobility/
transportation/ dd124_ cars. html. Accessed July 8, 2008.
Hildebrand, Eric D. 2003. " Dimensions in Elderly Travel Behaviour: A Simplified
Activity- Based Model using Lifestyle Clusters." Transportation 30 ( 3): 285- 306.
Houser, Ari. 2005. Community Mobility Options: The Older Person's Interest.
Washington, D. C.: AARP.
Kalata, Jean. 2005. The Effects of Gasoline Costs on U. S. Residents 50+. Washington,
D. C.: AARP.
Kostyniuk, Lidia P., and Jean T. Shope. 2003. " Driving and Alternatives: Older Drivers
in Michigan." Journal of Safety Research 34 ( 4): 407- 414.
Marottoli, Richard A., Carlos F. Mendes de Leon and Thomas A. Glass. 2000.
" Consequences of Driving Cessation: Decreased Out- of- Home Activity Levels." Journals
of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences 55B ( 6): S334- 40.
McKnight, A. James. 2003. " The Freedom of the Open Road: Driving and Older Adults."
Generations ( San Francisco, Calif.) 27 ( 2): 25- 31.
Nelson, Brittne M., and Katherine Bridges. 2006. Traveling the Roads in Rhode Island:
An AARP Member Survey. Washington, D. C.: AARP.
Persson, D. 1993. " The Elderly Driver: Deciding when to Stop." The Gerontologist 33
( 1): 88- 91.
Raitanen, Tarjaliisa, et al. 2003. " Why do Older Drivers Reduce Driving? Findings from
Three European Countries." Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and
Behaviour 6 ( 2): 81- 95.
Rosenbloom, Sandra. 2001. " Sustainability and Automobility among the Elderly: An
International Assessment." Transportation 28 ( 4): 375- 408.
Stowell- Ritter, Anita. 2006. 2006 Utah Transportation Survey: Aging and Mobility.
Washington, D. C.: AARP.
Stowell- Ritter, Anita, Audrey K. Straight and Ed Evans. 2002. Understanding Senior
Transportation: Report and Analysis of a Survey of Consumers Age 50+. Washington,
D. C.: AARP.
Straight, Audrey K. 1997. Co

Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.

Copyright to this resource is held by the creating agency and is provided here for educational purposes only. It may not be downloaded, reproduced or distributed in any format wihtout written permission of the creating agency. Any attempt to circumvent the access controls placed on this file is a violation of United States and international copyright laws, and is subject to criminal prosecution.

ORIGINS AND DESTINATIONS
STUDY OF OLDER PERSONS
Final Report 614
Prepared by:
Kathleen L. Andereck, Ph. D.
Tourism Consultant
8134 W. Palmaire Avenue
Glendale, AZ 85303
James McCabe, Ph. D.
ElderCare Resources
Assisted by: Leah Wyllys and Kathryn Pruess
JUNE 2008
Prepared for:
Arizona Department of Transportation
206 South 17th Avenue
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
in cooperation with
U. S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
The contents of the report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for
the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not
necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Arizona Department of
Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not
constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. Trade or manufacturers’
names which may appear herein are cited only because they are considered
essential to the objectives of the report. The U. S. Government and The State of
Arizona do not endorse products or manufacturers.
Technical Report Documentation Page
1. Report No.
FHWA- AZ- 08- 614
2. Government Accession No.
3. Recipient’s Catalog No.
4. Title and Subtitle
5. Report Date
June 2008
ORIGINS AND DESTINATIONS STUDY OF OLDER PERSONS 6. Performing Organization Code
7. Authors
Kathleen L. Andereck, Ph. D.; James McCabe, Ph. D.
8. Performing Organization Report No.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
Tourism Consultant, 8134 W. Palmaire Ave., Glendale, AZ 85303
10. Work Unit No.
11. Contract or Grant No.
SPR- PL- 1-( 69) 614
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
206 S. 17TH AVENUE
13. Type of Report & Period Covered
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85007
Project Manager: John Semmens
14. Sponsoring Agency Code
15. Supplementary Notes
Prepared in cooperation with the U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration
16. Abstract
The purpose of this research was to help provide insight into the travel behavior and transportation needs of older persons in
Pima County. Several methods of data collection were done including face- to- face in- home interviews of seniors with
mobility limitations, interviews with seniors who attended senior centers, and a mail survey to a sample that was
representative of seniors in Pima County. The results of the study suggest that seniors are primarily responsible for meeting
their own transportation needs. However as these seniors age, they are facing more challenges in managing their needs to
travel freely around their communities. The seniors we surveyed at the senior centers are more at risk than the seniors we
surveyed through the mailed survey because of lower income, lower health status, and a larger number who live alone.
Seniors’ driving habits are changing. Almost half report driving less in the past 2 years and 40% of respondents had no
knowledge of public transportation services available in their communities. While 71% would prefer a friend or family
member to drive when they cannot, seniors who live alone will have limited options.
The lack of transportation services can have a significant impact on quality of life for these seniors. Many cited less
participation in leisure activities because of driving less. More than half feel that it would be difficult to remain in their
current home if they are no longer able to drive. In fact, 24% have moved into a new residence since they stopped driving.
Seniors need more transportation options to stay active and involved. The vast majority of the “ trips” they make on a
daily/ weekly basis are for social events, to do “ errands”, or go to church.
Seniors feel that improving the quality of transportation services in the community will involve more dependable
transportation and having a variety of options for transportation services.
17. Key Words
Senior citizens, older persons, transportation, mobility,
driving behavior, barriers, community transportation
18. Distribution Statement
Document is available to the
U. S. public through the
National Technical Information
Service, Springfield, Virginia
22161
23. Registrant’s Seal
19. Security Classification
Unclassified
20. Security Classification
Unclassified
21. No. of Pages
64
22. Price
SI* ( MODERN METRIC) CONVERSION FACTORS
APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI UNITS APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS FROM SI UNITS
Symbol When You Know Multiply By To Find Symbol Symbol When You Know Multiply By To Find Symbol
LENGTH
LENGTH
in inches 25.4 millimeters mm mm millimeters 0.039 inches in
ft feet 0.305 meters m m meters 3.28 feet ft
yd yards 0.914 meters m m meters 1.09 yards yd
mi miles 1.61 kilometers km km kilometers 0.621 miles mi
AREA
AREA
in2 square inches 645.2 square millimeters mm2 mm2 Square millimeters 0.0016 square inches in2
ft2 square feet 0.093 square meters m2 m2 Square meters 10.764 square feet ft2
yd2 square yards 0.836 square meters m2 m2 Square meters 1.195 square yards yd2
ac acres 0.405 hectares ha ha hectares 2.47 acres ac
mi2 square miles 2.59 square kilometers km2 km2 Square kilometers 0.386 square miles mi2
VOLUME VOLUME
fl oz fluid ounces 29.57 milliliters mL mL milliliters 0.034 fluid ounces fl oz
gal gallons 3.785 liters L L liters 0.264 gallons gal
ft3 cubic feet 0.028 cubic meters m3 m3 Cubic meters 35.315 cubic feet ft3
yd3 cubic yards 0.765 cubic meters m3 m3 Cubic meters 1.308 cubic yards yd3
NOTE: Volumes greater than 1000L shall be shown in m3.
MASS
MASS
oz ounces 28.35 grams g g grams 0.035 ounces oz
lb pounds 0.454 kilograms kg kg kilograms 2.205 pounds lb
T short tons ( 2000lb) 0.907 megagrams
( or “ metric ton”)
mg
( or “ t”)
Mg megagrams
( or “ metric ton”)
1.102 short tons ( 2000lb) T
TEMPERATURE ( exact)
TEMPERATURE ( exact)
º F Fahrenheit
temperature
5( F- 32)/ 9
or ( F- 32)/ 1.8
Celsius temperature º C º C Celsius temperature 1.8C + 32 Fahrenheit
temperature
º F
ILLUMINATION ILLUMINATION
fc foot candles 10.76 lux lx lx lux 0.0929 foot- candles fc
fl foot- Lamberts 3.426 candela/ m2 cd/ m2 cd/ m2 candela/ m2 0.2919 foot- Lamberts fl
FORCE AND PRESSURE OR STRESS
FORCE AND PRESSURE OR STRESS
lbf poundforce 4.45 newtons N N newtons 0.225 poundforce lbf
lbf/ in2 poundforce per
square inch
6.89 kilopascals kPa kPa kilopascals 0.145 poundforce per
square inch
lbf/ in2
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................ 1
I. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................... 3
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY...................................................................................... 3
STUDY METHODS................................................................................................... 3
II. LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................... 5
OLDER PEOPLE AND MOBILITY ......................................................................... 5
Transportation and Adapting to Aging ................................................................. 6
Reasons for Transportation Adaptations............................................................... 8
Summary ............................................................................................................... 9
III. INTERVIEW, DIARY AND SURVEY RESULTS............................................. 11
INTERVIEWS WITH MOBILITY IMPAIRED SENIORS .................................... 11
TRAVEL DIARIES OF SENIOR CENTER ATTENDEES.................................... 13
Profile of Respondents........................................................................................ 14
Changes in Driving Behavior.............................................................................. 16
Daily Trip Behavior ............................................................................................ 18
Weekly Trip Behavior......................................................................................... 22
MAIL SURVEY OF PIMA COUNTY SENIORS................................................... 23
Nature of the Sample – Demographics ............................................................... 23
Driving Behavior of Respondents....................................................................... 26
Perceptions of Transportation in the Community............................................... 32
Knowledge and Use of Public Transportation .................................................... 35
Driving Experience ............................................................................................. 37
IV. CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................... 41
V. RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................................ 43
APPENDIX A: OPEN ENDED RESPONSES ........................................................... 45
REFERENCES.............................................................................................................. 57
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Places interviewees need to go ........................................................................ 11
Table 2 Residence of respondents................................................................................. 13
Table 3 Senior centers attended by respondents ........................................................... 13
Table 4 Gender of respondents ..................................................................................... 14
Table 5 Age of respondents .......................................................................................... 14
Table 6 Retirement status.............................................................................................. 14
Table 7 Education level................................................................................................. 14
Table 8 Income.............................................................................................................. 15
Table 9 Household composition ................................................................................... 15
Table 10 Health status..................................................................................................... 15
Table 11 Changes in participation of leisure activities over the last two years .............. 15
Table 12 Driving status of respondents........................................................................... 15
Table 13 Vehicle ownership of respondents ................................................................... 16
Table 14 Driving status of respondent’s spouses............................................................ 16
Table 15 Retirement status of spouse ............................................................................. 16
Table 16 Health status of spouse..................................................................................... 16
Table 17 Driving reduction............................................................................................. 16
Table 18 Driving cessation ............................................................................................. 17
Table 19 Changes in driving habits................................................................................. 17
Table 20 Driving reduction............................................................................................. 17
Table 21 Daily destinations of seniors............................................................................ 18
Table 22 Purpose of daily trips ....................................................................................... 19
Table 23 Form of transportation used ............................................................................. 20
Table 24 Pay for the ride................................................................................................. 20
Table 25 Times left house............................................................................................... 20
Table 26 Times returned to house................................................................................... 20
Table 27 Reasons for not going out ................................................................................ 21
Table 28 Weekly destinations ......................................................................................... 22
Table 29 Transportation related problems ...................................................................... 23
Table 30 Gender and age of respondent.......................................................................... 23
Table 31 Other members of household ........................................................................... 24
Table 32 Education level of respondents ........................................................................ 24
Table 33 Employment status of respondents .................................................................. 24
Table 34 Ethnicity/ race of respondents........................................................................... 25
Table 35 Annual household income before taxes ........................................................... 25
Table 36 Current health status of respondent.................................................................. 25
Table 37 Changes in participation of leisure activities over the last two years .............. 25
Table 38 Have current driver’s license ........................................................................... 26
Table 39 Currently drives ............................................................................................... 26
Table 40 Former driver ................................................................................................... 26
Table 41 At least one other person in household drives ................................................. 26
Table 42 Someone in household owns a vehicle ............................................................ 26
Table 43 Reduced driving in past two years ................................................................... 27
Table 44 Stopped driving in the past two years .............................................................. 27
Table 45 Altered driving habits with age........................................................................ 27
Table 46 Type of transportation used ............................................................................. 28
Table 47 Number of trips away from residence to another place
during a typical week ....................................................................................... 28
Table 48 Number of times drove self for trips away from residence
during a typical week ....................................................................................... 29
Table 49 Number of times participant went out ............................................................. 29
Table 50 Type of transportation used ............................................................................. 30
Table 51 Reasons for not going out ................................................................................ 30
Table 52 Getting around in the future if unable to drive ................................................ 31
Table 53 How often rode with someone else in the last two months.............................. 31
Table 54 Person rode with when riding with someone else............................................ 31
Table 55 Concerns when getting a ride with someone else ............................................ 32
Table 56 Difficult to continue to reside in current home if no longer able to drive ....... 32
Table 57 Satisfaction with ability to get around in community...................................... 32
Table 58 Quality of transportation services in community............................................. 33
Table 59 If still driving, recommendations to improve driving conditions
in community or area ....................................................................................... 33
Table 60 Driving difficulties in community ................................................................... 34
Table 61 Concerns about local traffic, roads, streets and street signs in community ..... 35
Table 62 Knowledge of public transportation available in community
( not including taxis) ......................................................................................... 36
Table 63 Amount of personal public transportation usage in past two months.............. 36
Table 64 If public transportation is available, the extent of problems
associated with usage....................................................................................... 36
Table 65 Respondent was a driver in the past................................................................. 37
Table 66 Number of years since stopped driving ........................................................... 37
Table 67 Moved to new residence since they stopped driving ....................................... 37
Table 68 Transportation problems influenced decision to move.................................... 37
Table 69 The extent that transportation problems interfere with specific trips .............. 38
Table 70 Affect the following problems had on the decision to stop driving................. 39
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this research was to provide insight into the travel behavior and
transportation needs of older persons in Pima County. Several methods of data collection
were done including face- to- face in- home interviews of seniors with mobility limitations,
interviews with seniors who attended senior centers, and a mail survey to a sample that
was representative of seniors in Pima County.
The results of the study suggest that seniors are primarily responsible for meeting their
own transportation needs. However as they age, they are facing more challenges in
managing their needs to travel freely around their communities. The seniors we surveyed
at the senior centers are more at risk than the seniors we surveyed through the mailed
survey because of lower income, lower health status, and a larger number who live alone.
Seniors make an average of 8.87 trips a week. Seniors report driving themselves for
almost 90% of those trips,. Less than 5% of seniors interviewed use any type of public or
senior/ disabled transportation services. For seniors who are “ mobility impaired” the
feeling is that public transportation is not usable because of their special needs, or long
waits, or they live in areas where these services are not available
Seniors’ driving habits are changing. Almost half report driving less in the past two years,
and 40% of respondents had no knowledge of public transportation services available in
their communities. While 71% would prefer a friend or family member to drive when
they cannot, seniors who live alone will have limited options.
The lack of transportation services can have a significant impact on quality of life for
these seniors. 25% cited less participation in leisure activities because of driving less.
56% feel that it would be difficult to remain in their current home if they are no longer
able to drive. In fact, 24% have moved into a new residence since they stopped driving.
Seniors need more transportation options to stay active and involved. The vast majority
of the “ trips” they make on a daily/ weekly basis are for social events, to do “ errands”, or
go to church.
Seniors feel that improving the quality of transportation services in the community will
involve more dependable transportation and having a variety of options for transportation
services.
2
3
I. INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this research was to help provide insight into the travel behavior and
transportation needs of older persons in Pima County. Issues such as travel within the
home community, barriers to mobility, and transportation needs among older adults
( seniors) have not been well researched. In this study older adults are defined as people
55 and older. This study provides the following information:
• General aspects of travel behavior among seniors in Pima County:
o Where do seniors need to go during the course of their daily lives?
o What means of transportation ( travel mode) do they use?
o How frequently do they take trips within their own communities?
o What is the average distance seniors travel to accomplish common daily
activities?
o What times of day do seniors most commonly travel within their
communities?
• Concerns related to driving and transportation in the community.
• Mobility constraints among seniors in Pima County:
o What barriers and constraints do seniors perceive with respect to travel in their
communities?
o How do they feel these barriers and constraints might be overcome?
o How do mobility issues affect seniors’ access to various services ( such as
health care, shopping, religious services, etc.) and social opportunities ( such
as senior centers, visits to family and friends, etc.)?
• Unmet transportation needs of seniors.
• Demographics of seniors.
STUDY METHODS
This project began with a comprehensive literature review of transportation needs and
issues with respect to older persons. This portion of the project is presented in section
two. The data collection phase involved two survey efforts and several interviews, the
results of which are presented in section three.
A first project component included interviews with 20 mobility impaired seniors. This
qualitative data focused specifically on the needs of seniors who are mobility impaired.
Participants were identified through My House Senior Living, an organization that works
with mobility impaired populations, and the Pima Council on Aging. Staff from My
House Senior Living volunteered to conduct the interviews as they were already known to
participants. Interviewees were asked who they live with ( if anyone); where they usually
need to go and how they get there; if they use public transportation, how difficult it is to
use, and what would make it easier; and problems they have experienced related to
transportation.
4
The first survey effort was a travel diary given to older adults. Data were collected for the
12 months between October 2006 and September 2007. A convenient sample of 135
seniors who visit senior centers or other senior facilities/ programs was asked to complete
a diary one day a month. There were eight senior centers in Pima County where
individuals were contacted including those in Tucson, Green Valley, Marana and Ajo.
The researchers went to each of the senior centers and gave a presentation to those in
attendance. Participants were enlisted and provided their year’s worth of diaries. Each
was assigned one day a month on which to complete their diaries. A mix of seniors who
have a car and drive as well as those who do not was included. Participants were sent post
card reminders shortly before their assigned date for completion of the diary every
month. The diary asked for travel origin, destination, time of travel, purpose of travel,
and form of transportation used. It also asked what barriers related to transportation, if
any, were encountered. The diary was available in English and Spanish.
The final data collection effort was a mail survey to a random sample of 1,500 older
adults in Pima County. A list was purchased from Survey Sampling, Inc. The survey
focused on perceived barriers to travel in the community, and transportation needs and
issues. A technique commonly used in social science research was used for the mail
survey. This technique employs an initial survey mailing that provides a questionnaire, a
cover letter, and a postage- paid reply envelope to prospective respondents. This was
followed by a post card follow- up to increase sample size. Normally, response rates are
determined by the salience of a study to prospective respondents. Controlling for non-deliverable
surveys ( 32), a 52% response rate was achieved for a final sample size of 760.
This is generally considered to be a good response rate.
To develop the survey instruments snap ® survey software was used. This allowed
scannable questionnaires to be developed, cutting down on data entry error and time. The
data was then exported to the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences for analysis.
5
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
OLDER PEOPLE AND MOBILITY
The expected increase in the number of older drivers has resulted in increased interest in
the issues that face this population. This is an issue not only in the United States, but
internationally as well ( Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003).
Many older people eventually must either adapt their driving behavior as they age or stop
driving altogether. Driving reduction or cessation clearly causes changes in lifestyle
( Bauer, Rottunda and Adler 2003). Mobility, or the ability to travel from one
place to another, is the manner in which people maintain their connection to society.
Ready access to friends and family, health care, social and recreation activities, and
goods and services are necessary to fully participate in everyday life ( Coughlin 2001)
The decreased ability or inability to do this is difficult for older people. Emotional
responses can include feelings of loss of independence and spontaneity, loss of control,
and fear of being a burden to families ( Bauer, Rottunda and Adler 2003; Coughlin
2001; Adler and Rottunda 2006). As well, people who stop driving may
experience depression, loneliness, feelings of isolation, and even illness ( Bauer, Rottunda
and Adler 2003). These emotions have also been associated with adverse social
conditions, including fewer out- of- home activities ( Bauer, Rottunda and Adler 2003;
Hildebrand 2003; Marottoli, Carlos F. Mendes de Leon, and Glass 2000).
Older people engage in local travel for a variety of reasons. The largest portion of trips is
for social and recreational reasons, such as visiting friends. They also take trips for
shopping. Compared to younger people, seniors take more trips for medical purposes and
for religious reasons, but fewer for work and work- related trips. They do most of their
daily driving in mid- day to avoid traffic as compared to younger people who drive more
in the morning, at lunch time, and in the after- work peak ( Collia, Sharp and Giesbrecht
2003).
Effective transportation arrangements contribute to older persons’ social integration by
facilitating community participation, social interaction, access to goods and services
( Glasgow and Blakely 2000), and medical access ( Collia, Sharp and Giesbrecht
2003). Mobility for older people should include the following ( Alsnih and Hensher 2003):
• access to places of desire such as visiting family and friends,
• the psychological benefits of travel where social contact and independence are
important aspects of mobility,
• the benefits of physical movement,
• maintaining social networks, and
• potential travel.
Issues among older drivers include safety concerns, barriers to driving, the manner in
which they are able to adapt their driving practices to compensate for problems they
6
encounter, and reasons for reducing or ceasing to drive ( Raitanen, Tormakangas,
Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003). This review will primarily focus on the barriers
and problems older people experience with respect to transportation and ways in which
they adapt.
Transportation and Adapting to Aging
Driving less. Many studies of older people have found that there is a correspondence
between aging and a reduction in driving. In the U. S., a lower percentage of older adults
report to be drivers than those less than 65 years old. Older people also travel less both
locally and long- distance. Older adults make fewer trips per day than younger adults and
also travel shorter distances ( Collia, Sharp and Giesbrecht 2003; Houser 2005).
A study of older people in three European countries found that a large percentage of
respondents reduced their amount of driving as they aged, with a correlation between age
and driving reduction including both diving less often and driving less distance
( Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003). There also appears to
be differing impacts on women than men, with women reducing driving to a greater
extent than men ( Bauer, Rottunda and Adler 2003; Collia, Sharp and Giesbrecht
2003; Dellinger, Sehgal, Sleet and Barrett- Connor 2001; Gallo, Rebok and
Lesikar 1999; Adler and Rottunda 2006; Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and
Marcellini 2003). This also is the case with people who have lower incomes: they
reduce their driving to a greater extent than those with higher incomes ( Straight 1997).
Older people report a number of difficulties related to road conditions. A study of older
drivers in Rhode Island found that drivers noted, in order of frequency, poor road
conditions, traffic congestion, faded or worn lane markings, headlight glare, fast traffic,
construction zones, merging or switching lanes, driving at night, entering or exiting
highways, narrow lanes, and the ability to see signals and signs as potential problems
( Nelson and Bridges 2006). Other studies have also noted problems among older
drivers with respect to inconsiderate drivers, congestion, night driving, poor roads,
driving costs, crime and fast traffic ( Stowell- Ritter, Straight and Evans 2002). They
reported that the biggest improvement needed is adequate and timely road maintenance
( Nelson and Bridges 2006).
Avoiding difficult traffic situations. Older people report adapting driving to aging by
avoiding difficult traffic situations ( Houser 2005). This includes avoiding driving at
dusk and dawn or at night ( Collia, Sharp and Giesbrecht 2003; Houser 2005;
Adler and Rottunda 2006; Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini
2003; Straight 1997); driving in bad road conditions ( Adler and Rottunda 2006;
Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003); driving in complicated
situations such as complex intersections or junctions ( Raitanen, Tormakangas,
Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003); driving during heavy traffic times
( Collia, Sharp and Giesbrecht 2003; Houser 2005; Raitanen, Tormakangas,
Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003; Straight 1997); driving on busy roads
( Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003); driving long distances
7
( Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003); driving in unfamiliar
areas ( Houser 2005; Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003);
and driving on freeways, highways, and interstates ( Adler and Rottunda 2006;
Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003). As with driving
reductions, women are more heavily influenced by avoidance of difficult situations than
men ( Adler and Rottunda 2006; Alsnih and Hensher 2003; Raitanen, Tormakangas,
Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003). At least in part, this is due to the longer life
expectancy of women as well as higher incidents of disability among older women
( Alsnih and Hensher 2003).
Transportation alternatives. Personal vehicles remain the primary form of transportation
for older people ( Collia, Sharp and Giesbrecht 2003; Houser 2005; Nelson and
Bridges 2006; Adler and Rottunda 2006). Most older people report that driving
is the primary way they get where they need to go ( Stowell- Ritter 2006;
Straight 1997). There is a strong preference for automobile based transportation and
older people express reservation about most alternates to driving ( Coughlin 2001).
Older people feel that automobiles are reliable, convenient, secure, flexible and allow
spontaneity ( Coughlin 2001). Though various forms of alternative transportation
exist for older people, they are often viewed as less desirable than driving oneself ( Bauer,
Rottunda and Adler 2003; Glasgow and Blakely 2000) and some seem to be
more acceptable than others. For some, finding alternatives can be difficult. Older people
note that having to rely on alternative transportation requires planning ahead ( Bauer,
Rottunda and Adler 2003; Adler and Rottunda 2006).
In general, public transportation such as buses is not viewed favorably ( Adler and
Rottunda 2006; Alsnih and Hensher 2003) and use is fairly low ( Collia, Sharp
and Giesbrecht 2003; Nelson and Bridges 2006; Stowell- Ritter 2006). Many
older people feel such options are neither adequate nor responsive to an older
person’s needs. They are described as inconvenient due to fixed schedules and stops or as
difficult to use due to seniors’ physical impairments ( Nelson and Bridges 2006;
Adler and Rottunda 2006; Stowell- Ritter, Straight and Evans 2002; Straight
2003). A primary issue with public buses is they require a certain level of
functional capability some older people do not have ( Glasgow and Blakely 2000).
Older people are also concerned with safety when using public transportation ( Nelson
and Bridges 2006; Adler and Rottunda 2006; Stowell- Ritter, Straight and Evans 2002;
Straight 2003). Other problems noted with respect to public transportation include
lack of shelter and a place to sit while waiting, that it is time consuming, the high
cost, and poor station and vehicle maintenance ( Nelson and Bridges 2006;
Stowell- Ritter 2006). Even so, there has been an increase in use of public trans-portation
by those 75 and older, but this tends to be restricted to those with higher
education and income living in higher residential density areas ( Glasgow and
Blakely 2000; Alsnih and Hensher 2003). Lack of information about community
transportation resources can exacerbate perceived problems ( Coughlin 2001;
Nelson and Bridges 2006) and in rural areas, public transportation is limited
( Glasgow and Blakely 2000; Houser 2005). Senior residences, senior centers, and
other similar facilities provide transportation services. These services are viewed
8
more favorably than public transportation ( Stowell- Ritter, Straight and Evans 2002),
but are often limited in geographic coverage and include limited destinations ( Glasgow
and Blakely 2000; Adler and Rottunda 2006).
Most older people rely on friends and family for transportation when they are unable to
drive ( Bauer, Rottunda and Adler 2003; Glasgow and Blakely 2000; Adler and
Rottunda 2006; Stowell- Ritter 2006) and see this as the preferred alternative to
driving ( Coughlin 2001). However, they often are concerned that they will
become a burden to family and friends ( Bauer, Rottunda and Adler 2003;
Coughlin 2001; Adler and Rottunda 2006; Stowell- Ritter, Straight and Evans
2002). Rides from children are often held in reserve for emergencies or for when the
need is greatest. An increasing problem is the dispersion of families with adult children
living far from their aging parents ( Bauer, Rottunda and Adler 2003). Another
issue is related to the life- styles of children with work and child- care demands ( Alsnih
and Hensher 2003). Many older people feel that riding with friends is preferable
to family as it provides more of a social experience ( Bauer, Rottunda and Adler 2003).
Older people also allow someone other than a spouse to drive their cars thereby
allowing them to use their own vehicle without the feelings of dependency or feeling like
a burden to others. However, there are safety issues with this practice. Often, the other
driver is an adult child, spouse of a child, or grandchild who does not own his or her own
car and is not on the older person’s insurance policy ( Hermanson 2005).
A number of older people report that they walk where they want to go. Walking appears
to be more prevalent than taking public transportation though primarily in urban areas
( Nelson and Bridges 2006). Walking is mentioned more frequently as a transportation
alternative among older people than among younger people ( Collia, Sharp and
Giesbrecht 2003). Trip chains are another response to help reduce driving. This
involves a sequence of stops on a trip to fulfill several purposes and minimize travel
time and distance ( Hensher and Reyes 2000; Alsnih and Hensher 2003).
Older people who are best able to meet their needs seem to have one or more of the
following sources of support ( Alsnih and Hensher 2003):
• spouses or others who drive,
• live with children or have children who live nearby,
• possess sufficient financial resources to purchase transport services,
• are strongly involved in a religious institution,
• reside in communities well serviced by transportation options for non- drivers,
• are physically able to use public transportation, and
• have reduced their activities and expectations to better adapt to their present situation.
Reasons for Transportation Adaptations
The literature suggests that there are two general models related to the mobility of older
people. One suggests that physical ( poor health and disability) and environmental factors
( such as distance and population density) are barriers to the use of transportation
9
alternatives. As well, a number of socio- demographic variables influence transportation
( Rosenbloom 2001). A second model proposes that several qualities of mobility
affect well- being, and these are moderated by socio- demographics and the site ( Carp
1988).
Several studies have considered the reasons older people reduce or stop driving.
Transportation problems increase as people age and experience health problems and the
loss of social networks ( Glasgow and Blakely 2000). The predominant reasons tend
to be less need for driving, often due to retirement from work ( Raitanen, Tormakangas,
Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003; Straight 1997) and health reasons ( Bauer, Rottunda
and Adler 2003; Collia, Sharp and Giesbrecht 2003; Gallo, Rebok and Lesikar 1999;
Adler and Rottunda 2006; Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003).
Other reasons include: difficulty with parking ( Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf
and Marcellini 2003); economic reasons, including the cost of gasoline ( Houser 2005;
Kalata 2005; Adler and Rottunda 2006; Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and
Marcellini 2003; Stowell- Ritter 2006; Straight 1997); hectic traffic ( Raitanen, Torma-kangas,
Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003; Stowell- Ritter 2006); difficulty handling a
car ( Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003); having someone to
do the driving ( Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003); not
having a car ( Glasgow and Blakely 2000; Houser 2005; Raitanen, Tormakangas,
Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003); having a frightening experience while driving
( Adler and Rottunda 2006); influence by family ( Adler and Rottunda 2006); in-fluence
by physicians ( Adler and Rottunda 2006), and inconsiderate drivers
( Stowell- Ritter 2006).
Studies also have been conducted using quantitative measures to determine predictor
variables for driving status. Significant relationships have been found between driving
reduction and increasing age ( Alsnih and Hensher 2003; Raitanen, Tormakangas,
Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003); chronic health conditions and mobility ( Kostyniuk
and Shope 2003; Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003);
increasing mobility related problems ( Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf
and Marcellini 2003); being retired ( Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and
Marcellini 2003); participation in leisure activities, both more or less depending on
the study ( McKnight 2003; Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003).
Summary
There seems to be a trend towards driving reduction and avoiding difficult traffic
conditions, and finally driving cessation, as people get older ( Dellinger, Sehgal, Sleet and
Barrett- Connor 2001; Hakamies- Blomqvist 2006; Adler and Rottunda 2006;
Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003; Stowell- Ritter 2006;
Stowell- Ritter, Straight and Evans 2002). Thus, transportation becomes increasingly
problematic as people age. Results of research suggest that decisions to reduce or
cease driving are complex and affected by many factors. The most influetial
10
reasons seem to be medical problems or deteriorating health ( Bauer, Rottunda
and Adler 2003; Dellinger, Sehgal, Sleet and Barrett- Connor 2001; Persson 1993;
Gebers and Peck 1992; Raitanen, Tormakangas, Mollenkopf and Marcellini 2003;
Stowell- Ritter, Straight and Evans 2002).
The effects of driving cessation can be emotional, social and even physical. Driving
cessation affects a person’s ability to function independently and participate in the
community thereby negatively influencing quality of life ( Bauer, Rottunda and Adler
2003; Alsnih and Hensher 2003). High levels of mobility are associated with
access, choice, opportunity and freedom ( Burns 1999; Alsnih and Hensher 2003).
As people get older and have more physical problems, they also experience
increasing transportation problems and their satisfaction with their ability to get to the
places they need and want to go decreases ( Stowell- Ritter 2006).
From a policy perspective, a focus on mobility and accessibility initiatives that benefit
older people would include transportation options that provide a sense of independence
and security and allow an individual a sense of dignity ( Alsnih and Hensher 2003).
Older people respond most favorably to transportation options that are convenient
and flexible, allow a certain level of independence, are inexpensive, provide social
contact with others, and are accessible to those with physical limitations and disabilities.
Negative attitudes are found toward options that force people to rely on others, are
difficult for disabled people to access, are expensive, and are restrictive of spontaneity in
trip taking ( Glasgow and Blakely 2000). Buses, for example, need to be physically
easy to negotiate, have schedules convenient for older people, and pick- up and drop- off
points the same to eliminate the need to walk between stops ( Glasgow and Blakely 2000).
Other options include networks of volunteer drivers who provide door- to- door on-demand
service ( Houser 2005). The primary issue is that in many areas, adequate
alternatives to the car for the elderly do not exist.
11
III. INTERVIEW, DIARY AND SURVEY RESULTS
Results from the diaries, surveys and interviews are presented in this section.
INTERVIEWS WITH MOBILITY IMPAIRED SENIORS
Interviews with mobility impaired seniors were conducted with 14 women and six men.
Two of the interviewees are in their 40s, eight in their 60s, and five each in their 70s and
80s. Of this group, 15 live alone, three live with a spouse and child, and two with a child.
All the interviewees must go to the doctor and most go to the pharmacy quite regularly
( Table 1). When they need to go somewhere, eight have a family member who can take
them ( a son or daughter, in one case a niece and in another a parent). The interviewees
also reported that other people or services are available to assist them:
Friend ( 3)
Neighbor ( 2)
Van service ( 8)
Yellow cab ( 4)
Bus ( 2)
Medical transport ( 3)
Other ( 4):
HandiCar ( 2)
Volunteer driver ( 1)
Table 1. Places interviewees need to go
Place to go Frequency How often
Doctor 20 Most respondents at least every 3 months or more,
some several times a month
Pharmacy 12 Most respondents 2 times a month
Other medical 5 Variable
Social events 3 Variable
Senior center 0
Visit family or friends 3 Variable
Grocery store 10 Once a week ( sometimes caregiver goes)
Church 3 Variable
Other 4 Variable
The interviewees were asked if they have a contact in case of emergency. Twelve
reported that they do ( usually a son or daughter, in one case a niece, and in another a
neighbor). One named 911.
Nine of the interviewees said they need to pay for transportation at least some of the time.
Most appear to be using VanTran, which charges a fairly small fee. Only four
12
respondents commented that they use public transportation. When asked what would
make it easier to use transportation services, the following comments were made:
• If they had any here in Catalina.
• It works fine for me.
• It's not possible, I have a catheter.
• If they came to my front door.
• Make faster.
• Don’t know.
• My health is too bad to wait in the sun for a bus.
• I am down a little road over a mile from the bus stop. I would have to take my
scooter there and I don't think they could load my scooter on the bus.
• If the bus could come down my side street and had a wheelchair lift and the driver
could put me in and out of the bus. I don't think that will ever happen.
• I can't take the bus-- no way.
• Sometimes I'll wait three solid hours waiting for yellow cab to come pick me up.
• If there were more buses that come by where I live and close enough I didn't have
to walk far and stand so long.
• The routes are not convenient ( 3 comments).
• Standing in the heat.
• Not sure.
When asked what they do if there is no one available to provide transportation, the
interviewees said:
• If it isn't too far I will walk.
• I take the bus.
• I don't go anywhere ( 9 comments).
• I don't go anywhere unless I can ride my scooter to the corner store.
• If VanTran can't accommodate me I don't go.
• I don't go. I wait until something works out so I can go or someone can go for me.
• Call cab.
• Loose my appointment.
• VanTran.
When asked what problems they have had related to transportation, interviewees noted:
• I just wish there were choices up here.
• None right now. I'm still able to get around… I am slow.
• I manage. If it's a bad day I just stay home.
• Waiting.
• Short notice.
• Too many to count.
• It's just too much trouble.
• If my daughter can't get away from work in the mines to take me somewhere I need to be.
• The seats of buses cut my circulation and when I get up I can't walk.
• Long time to be picked up.
• Waited for more than 3 hours at doctors’ appointments and dialysis.
13
Finally, interviewees were asked to describe an example of a transportation problem they
had at some point. A few shared an experience:
• There just isn't any, and I don't have a car. My children live too far away to help
out. I wish someone could help.
• Was waiting in dialysis for over 4 hours.
• Waited at rehab for 4- 5 hours.
• I missed my yellow cab return trip home and had to wait 5 hours at doctor’s office -
- that did it for me for awhile.
• I have friends and family who have never failed me yet.
• I'm fine now. At first I had a lot of problems but then I found VanTran.
• They forget about an appointment to take me somewhere and I'm late, and it is a
long wait when that happens. I was at the Dr. office 7 hours one day waiting for
them to come pick me up.
• Handi- car is perfect. I have no way to do anything of my own. My friends can't
drive anymore. I have no way to get anywhere other than my medical appointments.
• Where schedule on time never show up both times.
TRAVEL DIARIES OF SENIOR CENTER ATTENDEES
Respondents for the diary study were recruited from senior centers in several
communities in Pima County ( Tables 2 and 3). This group can not be assumed to
represent seniors in general, but can provide some insight into the driving behavior and
transportation needs of older people in the county. ( N = number of respondents.)
Table 2. Residence of respondents ( N= 130)
City of Residence Percent
Ajo 6.4
Benson .9
Green Valley 15.5
Marana 9.1
Tucson 68.1
Table 3. Senior centers attended by respondents ( N= 278)
Senior Center Percent
El Rio 13.8
Armory 12.3
Quincy 16.2
El Pueblo 10.8
East Side 6.2
Marana 8.5
Udall 13.8
Green Valley 13.1
Ajo 5.4
14
Profile of Respondents
The respondents from the senior centers are mostly women and range in age from 52 to
97, with an average of 73 years ( Tables 4 and 5). Most are retired ( Table 6). Their
education level is fairly low, with most having high school level educations or less ( Table
7). Very few have college level education. Incomes are also low, with nearly a third
making $ 20,000 or less per year ( Table 8). Most live alone or with a spouse ( Table 9),
and rate their health as fair or good ( Table 10), and report that their participation in
leisure activities has stayed about the same over the past two years ( Table 11).
Table 4. Gender of respondents ( N= 126)
Gender Percent
Female 77.0
Male 23.0
Table 5. Age of respondents ( N= 116)
Age Percent
50s 3.5
60s 34.3
70s 66.1
80s 26.7
90s 3.5
Mean age 73
Table 6. Retirement status ( N= 126)
Retired Percent
Yes 87.3
No 12.7
Table 7. Education level ( N= 123)
Education Percent
Less than High School 34.1
High School Grad 22.8
Some College/ Tech School 26.8
4- year Degree 9.8
Advanced Degree 6.5
15
Table 8. Income ( N= 110)
Income Percent
Less than $ 20,000 65.5
$ 20,000- 39,000 26.4
$ 40,000- 59,000 2.7
$ 60,000- 79,000 2.7
$ 80,000- 99,000 0.9
$ 100,000- 199,999 0.9
$ 120,000- 139,999 0.9
Table 9. Household composition ( N= 122)
Who Lives With You Percent
No One 48.4
Spouse 27.9
Other 12.3
Adult Children 6.4
Children 5.7
Caregiver 3.3
Grandchildren 2.5
Table 10. Health status ( N= 117)
Your Health Percent
Poor 7.7
Fair 45.3
Good 37.6
Excellent 9.4
Table 11. Changes in participation of leisure activities over the last two years
( N= 106)
Amount Percent
More than before 27.4
Same as before 41.5
Less than before 31.1
Most of the respondents are still driving, though a substantial number are not ( Table 12).
Most also still own a vehicle, but many do not ( Table 13).
Table 12. Driving status of respondents ( N= 125)
Drive Percent
Yes 59.2
No 40.8
16
Table 13. Vehicle ownership of respondents ( N= 123)
Own Vehicle Percent
Yes 61.0
No 39.0
Those respondents that still have a spouse ( n= 69) indicated that the spouse does not
drive, is retired, and is generally in fair to good health ( Tables 14- 16).
Table 14. Driving status of respondent’s spouse ( N= 69)
Spouse Drive Percent
Yes 44.9
No 55.1
Table 15. Retirement status of spouse ( N= 63)
Spouse Retired Percent
Yes 57.1
No 42.9
Table 16. Health status of spouse ( N= 44)
Health of Spouse Percent
Poor 20.5
Fair 27.3
Good 40.8
Excellent 11.4
Changes in Driving Behavior
More than half of the respondents from senior centers indicated they have reduced the
amount of driving they do in the past two years ( Table 17). Almost a third has stopped
driving all together ( Table 18). They noted that they have changed their driving behavior
in a number of specific ways since getting older ( Table 19). The highest percentage
reported that they avoid driving at night, avoid high traffic times, drive fewer miles,
avoid driving long distances, and avoid driving in bad road conditions. The most
common reason they provided for changes in driving is that they no longer work ( Table
20). They also noted health reasons and the cost being too high. Few mentioned difficulty
handling the car or not trusting their driving ability.
Table 17. Driving reduction ( N= 81)
Reduced Driving Percent
Yes 53.1
No 46.9
17
Table 18. Driving cessation ( N= 49)
Stopped Driving Percent
Yes 32.7
No 67.3
Table 19. Changes in driving habits ( N= 76)
Altered Driving Habits as Gotten Older Percent
Avoid driving at night 29.2
Avoid high traffic times 25.4
Drive fewer miles 23.9
Avoid driving long distances 22.3
Avoid driving in bad road conditions 20.8
Drive fewer days 16.9
Drive less time 16.2
Do not drive during bad weather 16.2
Do not drive in unfamiliar areas 15.5
Avoid driving on busy roads 13.9
Stopped driving altogether 12.3
Avoid driving on Interstates/ Highways 10.0
Never drive at night 9.2
Other 9.2
Table 20. Driving reduction ( N= 79)
Reduced Amount of Driving Percent
No longer work 30.0
Health reasons 19.2
Costs too much 18.5
Someone else drives 11.5
Traffic too hectic 10.8
No vehicle 10.0
Do not trust my ability 6.2
Car is difficult to handle 3.9
Do not need to drive 3.9
Parking is a problem 3.1
18
Daily Trip Behavior
Travel diary respondents were assigned a day for each month of the year. They were
asked to indicate where they went and why they went there for that one day each month.
They were allowed to report from one to four trips out of the house each of those days.
Table 21 shows the most frequent reasons they went out and Table 22 shows the purposes
of those trips.
The most frequent daily destination of respondents is the senior center, obviously an
artifact of the sample that would not emerge with a general population of seniors. This is
followed by trips to a store or grocery store. Dining, traveling, and going to church are
the next most common destinations. The most frequent trip purpose is going out for
meals. This finding is likely more common among the senior center respondent than it
would be among a general group of respondents as many go to the senior center to eat
lunch. This is followed by going out for a variety of social events or meetings, running
errands, and buying food or other shopping.
Table 21. Daily destinations of seniors
Destination Frequency Destination Frequency
Bakery 2 Mortuary 1
Bank 18 Movie 3
Bus 1 No Trips 47
Business 18 Park 40
Camping 1 Pharmacy 13
Casino 2 Polling Place 1
Church 62 Pool 2
Dining 89 Post Office 26
Doctor 49 Rehab Center 1
Errand 7 Residence 68
Farm 1 Salvation Army 7
Food Bank 4 School 7
Gas Station 3 Senior Center 288
Grocery Store 90 Social Event 13
Gym 9 Social Meeting 17
Hospital 16 Store 130
Hotel 2 Tax Office 1
Lab 3 Traveling 76
Library 11 Visiting 2
Lunch 1 Walking 2
Work 9
19
Table 22. Purpose of daily trips
Purpose Frequency Purpose Frequency
Appointment 16 Health 1
Auto, maintenance 5 Holiday 1
Bank 1 Meals 229
Baptism 1 Medical 36
Buy food 93 Medicine 12
Catch bus 1 Oil Change 1
Choir 2 Park 1
Church 4 Pay bills 1
Class/ education/
teaching 8 Post Office 1
Dining 1 Pumpkin 1
Donating 1 Residence 1
Entertainment 36 Rest 1
Errands 103 Shopping 70
Exercising 50 Social event/ meeting 32
Funeral 3 Socializing 140
Garage sales 2 Store 3
Garbage 1 Visiting 14
Get gas 10 Volunteer 24
Grocery store 2 Voting 1
Haircut 8 Work 17
Have fun 2 Worship 26
When seniors leave home, they most often drive their own cars ( Table 23). A distant
second form of transportation is riding with another person. Public transportation is not
used very often. When respondents do have to take alternative forms of transportation,
they usually do not have to pay for the ride ( Table 24). Respondents reported that they
drive anywhere from one to 250 miles during any one trip during the day. The average
number of miles is 15 per trip and the median is about eight miles. They most often leave
home in the morning, either during “ rush hour” or later in the morning and return in early
afternoon ( Tables 25 and 26). It is notable that the seniors in this group rarely are out of
the house at night ( after 7: 00 p. m.)
20
Table 23. Form of transportation used
Transportation Percent
My vehicle that I drove 79.9
Someone drove me in their vehicle 15.8
Senior Center transportation 12.2
Bus 10.1
My vehicle that someone else drove 8.3
Walk 6.8
Other 6.1
Other public transportation 4.0
Dial- a- ride/ VanTran 2.2
Taxi 0.0
Bicycle 0.0
N= 278 trips; respondents were able to select all that apply
Table 24. Pay for the ride
Pay for transportation Percent
Yes 37.0
No 63.0
N= 289
Table 25. Times left house
Travel times Percent
Early morning ( before 7: 00 a. m.) 3.0
Morning rush- hour ( 7: 01 a. m.- 9: 00 a. m.) 35.5
Late morning ( 9: 01 a. m.- noon) 33.6
Afternoon ( noon- 7: 00 p. m.) 26.8
Night ( 7: 01 p. m. on) 1.1
N= 634 trips
Table 26. Times returned to house
Travel times Percent
Early morning ( before 7: 00 a. m.) 1.4
Morning rush- hour ( 7: 01 a. m.- 9: 00 a. m.) 1.0
Late morning ( 9: 01 a. m.- noon) 19.2
Early afternoon ( noon- 4: 00 p. m.) 49.2
Late afternoon ( 4: 01 p. m- 7: 00 p. m.) 21.0
Night ( 7: 01 p. m. on) 8.4
N= 510 trips
21
The reasons respondents do not go out are quite similar to those found in the general
survey ( reported later in this report) as far as rank goes, though they tend to note more
barriers. Usually when respondents did not go somewhere on a particular day, it was
because they did not need to go out ( Table 27). They also noted gas being too expensive
and not feeling well as barriers. They were more likely to indicate they were inhibited by
bad weather, not driving at night, and too much traffic, than were those in the general
population. When weather was an issue, respondents indicated it was too cold in the
winter, or too hot in the summer. “ Other” reasons varied but were usually related to
health issues.
Table 27. Reasons for not going out
Reason Percent
Didn’t need to go anywhere 24.8
Gasoline too expensive 11.8
Not feeling well 11.1
Other 9.2
Bad weather 7.8
Do not drive at night 7.2
Too much traffic 7.2
No one available to drive me 5.9
Unable to leave house due to health problems 5.2
Lack of adequate/ convenient public transportation 3.3
Unreliable vehicle 2.6
Public transportation too expensive 2.0
Poor road conditions 2.0
N= 153 responses
Comments relative to barriers included:
• Costco, I walked, belt broke on air conditioner cost $ 383 to fix, 1/ 2 each way, cab
back.
• We need to go out one form or another to feel better.
• If gas was not so expensive we could solve our problem and feel more satisfied.
• I have had no problems with VanTran program. They are very punctual and
attentive. They all transport us and care for us well.
• I have no problem with services because VanTran is very attentive and all give
good service.
• I think we should solve the problem with help that the price of gas isn't so high for
being able to go out daily to our businesses.
• Lots of traffic Pantano and Broadway-- no one works!!
• My car was in the shop.
• No A/ C in the van, too hot to go anywhere until we get it fixed.
• One day senior center for 2 meals.
22
• Suburban had hit and run damage to left passenger door. Had sub in shop for repairs
8/ 27- 8/ 31 used rental car that time got sub back Fri 8/ 31 everything looks and
works fine.
• Thanks to God, I have no impediments.
• The transportation service is excellent. They provide me very good service. They
always arrive for me at the time I indicate. Thanks for the good service.
Weekly Trip Behavior
Diary respondents were asked a few questions about their weekly travel behavior in
addition to the daily questions. Respondents reported that on a weekly basis, they tend to
go somewhere from zero to 40 times with an average of eight times per week. The types
of places they go are summarized in Table 28. They most often go to the senior center
though this is not typical of seniors in general. They also go to the store or grocery store
quite often, as well as out to eat. The respondents go to the doctor, various events, to visit
friends, to visit family, and to church fairly frequently. They rarely noted encountering
problems with transportation; but when they did they usually indicated that accidents or
traffic are the primary concerns ( Table 29).
Table 28. Weekly destinations
Destination Frequency Destination Frequency
Airport 4 Meetings 18
Bank 24 Nursing home 1
Baseball game 2 Out of town 8
Camp 3 Park 9
Casino 7 Parks and recreation 1
Chamber of commerce 1 Post office 33
Church 48 Recycle 2
Country club 1 Salvation Army 12
Dining 102 School 11
Doctor 90 Senior center 283
Events ( fashion show, zoo,
dances, golf, fishing, pool,
sight seeing, Oct. fest,
concerts, movies, museum)
71 Shuffleboard 1
Exercise 18 Store 121
Food bank 1 VFW 7
Gas station 11 Visit family at work 4
Grocery store 196 Visit family’s house 49
Hair appt. 3 Visit friends 2
Hospital 23 Visit friend's house 59
Insurance 1 Volunteer work 7
Library 10 Work 25
Yard sale 1
23
Table 29. Transportation related problems
Problems encountered Frequency
Accidents on road 8
Almost in an accident 2
Bus route not flexible ( too restrictive) 2
Car in shop 5
Construction 4
Gas prices too high 4
Had to use taxi & too expensive 1
No bus service 2
Surgery ( can't drive) 1
Traffic 7
MAIL SURVEY OF PIMA COUNTY SENIORS
Results from the mail survey are presented in this section. The purpose of the mail survey
was to gather transportation related information from seniors in Pima County.
Respondents live in various zip codes within the Pima County boundaries.
Nature of the Sample – Demographics
The demographics portion of the questionnaire was completed by 760 respondents. The
average age of respondents is 70.4 years old, with 30.9% of respondents being female,
and 69.1% being male. It is important to note that sample gender proportions probably
do not reflect actual gender proportions among the general population given biases in the
names attached to addresses which are more often male. The majority of respondents are
either married or have a partner with whom they live ( Table 30). About 8% of
respondents have adult children living within their households ( Table 31).
Table 30. Gender and age of respondent ( N= 732)
Gender/ age Percent
Female 30.9
Male 69.1
Mean age M= 70.4
24
Table 31. Other members of household ( N= 733)
Household members Percent
Spouse/ partner 63.8
No one 29.9
Adult children 8.3
Other family member 4.1
Children under 18 years old 2.7
Grandchildren under 18 years old 1.9
Other 1.5
Caregiver .4
The following tables provide information about the education level, employment status,
ethnicity and household income of the respondents. Respondents have almost equal
levels of having only a high school education ( 20.1%), some college ( 24.9%), four year
college degree ( 21.1%), and advanced college degree ( 23.7%). A very small number
( 4.4%) received a degree from technical school ( Table 32). The majority are retired
( 71.8%), with 17.5% still employed full- time ( Table 33). The most identified racial or
ethnic group is European American/ White ( 90.3%) ( Table 34). Just over one quarter of
the respondents ( 26.9%) reported earning between $ 20,000 and $ 39,999 annually. One
fifth ( 20%) report earning between $ 40,000 and $ 59,999 annually with the next highest
income level being less than $ 20,000 per year ( 16.7%) ( Table 35).
Table 32. Education level of respondents ( N= 735)
Level of education Percent
Less than high school graduate 5.9
High school graduate 20.1
Some college 24.9
Technical school degree 4.4
Four year college degree 21.1
Advanced college degree 23.7
Table 33. Employment status of respondents ( N= 731)
Employment status Percent
Retired 71.8
Employed full- time 17.5
Employed part- time 9.8
Homemaker 5.2
On disability 5.1
Other 3.0
25
Table 34. Ethnicity/ race of respondents ( N= 729)
Race/ ethnicity Percent
European American/ White 90.3
Hispanic/ Latino 7.7
African American/ Black 1.2
American Indian 1.5
Asian/ Pacific Islander .8
Other .8
Table 35. Annual household income before taxes ( N= 669)
Percent
Less than $ 20,000 16.7
$ 20,000 - $ 39,999 26.9
$ 40,000 - $ 59,999 20.0
$ 60,000 - $ 79,999 14.1
$ 80,000 - $ 99,999 8.4
$ 100,000 or more 13.9
The majority of respondents are still experiencing good health ( 47.8%), or very good
health ( 28.0%), with almost one fifth ( 19.5%) experiencing fair health ( Table 36). Most
( 61.2%) have also been able to maintain the same level of leisure activity participation
over the past couple of years, though somewhat over a quarter report less participation
( Table 37).
Table 36. Current health status of respondent ( N= 738)
Current health Percent
Poor 4.7
Fair 19.5
Good 47.8
Very good 28.0
Table 37. Changes in participation of leisure activities over the last two years
( N= 734)
Amount Percent
More than before 12.0
Same as before 61.2
Less than before 26.8
26
Driving Behavior of Respondents
Most of the respondents of this study ( 94.4%) currently have a driver’s license and
continue to drive ( 91.3%) ( Tables 38 and 39). The majority of those who do not currently
have a driver’s license ( 76.9%) previously had one ( Table 40). Roughly two- thirds
( 65.9%) of respondent households have at least one person who drives with 87.3%
having someone in the household who owns a vehicle ( Tables 41 and 42).
Table 38. Have current driver’s license ( N= 755)
Has license Percent
Yes 94.4
No 5.6
Table 39. Currently drives ( N= 748)
Drive Percent
Yes 91.3
No 8.7
Table 40. Former driver ( N= 65)
Have had license Percent
Yes 76.9
No 23.1
Table 41. At least one other person in household drives ( N= 753)
Someone drives Percent
Yes 65.9
No 34.1
Table 42. Someone in household owns a vehicle ( N= 753)
Someone owns vehicle Percent
Yes 87.3
No 12.7
As they have gotten older, respondents have altered their driving habits in many ways. In
the past two years, 42.3% of respondents reduced the amount of driving they did. Only
8.6% have stopped driving completely in the past two years, showing that the majority of
respondents are still driving ( Tables 43 and 44). Some more specific driving behavior
changes were noted, as well. While 10.1% have stopped driving completely ( includes
more than the past two years), about 24% report driving for less time ( 24.6%) and fewer
2 7
days ( 24.0%) during the week ( Table 45). A large number of respondents report driving
fewer miles per week ( 40.3%), avoiding night driving ( 43%), and avoiding driving during
busy traffic times ( 41.6%). Also see Appendix A for comments.
Table 43. Reduced driving in past two years ( N= 716)
Reduced Percent
Yes 42.3
No 57.7
Table 44. Stopped driving in the past two years ( N= 593)
Stopped Percent
Yes 8.6
No 91.4
Table 45. Altered driving habits with age ( N= 524)
Driving Habit Percent
Avoid driving at night 43.9
Avoid busy traffic times 41.6
Drive fewer miles per week 40.3
Avoid bad road conditions 31.1
Avoid long distances 29.0
Avoid bad weather 27.5
Drive less time during the week 24.6
Drive fewer days during the week 24.0
Avoid unfamiliar areas 21.9
Avoid busy roads 16.8
Avoid interstates/ highways 12.6
Have completely stopped driving 10.1
Never drive at night 6.5
Other 5.2
Of the types of transportation available, most of the respondents ( 89.4%) prefer to drive
themselves, while many ( 34.8%) ride with family or a friend ( Table 46). Very few use
public transportation or other alternative means of transportation.
2 8
Table 46. Type of transportation used ( N= 726)
Mode of transportation Percent
Drive self 89.4
Ride with family or friend 34.8
Walk 9.2
Other 3.0
Use public transportation 2.3
Transportation for disabled 1.4
Taxi 1.4
Senior or community van 1.2
In a typical week, respondents report that they take between zero and 40 trips away from
their residence, with the highest number of trips being four ( 10.7%), five ( 12.6%), seven
( 12.1%) and ten ( 12.4%) ( Table 47). The number of times they drove themselves on
these trips varies between zero and 38 times, with a larger percentage driving themselves
five times ( 12.6%), seven times ( 11.4%), and ten times ( 12%) ( Table 48).
Table 47. Number of trips away from residence to another place during a typical
week ( N= 713)
Number of trips Percent Number of trips Percent
0 0.4 14 3.8
1 3.0 15 4.1
2 3.7 16 0.4
3 6.5 17 0.1
4 10.7 18 1.1
5 12.6 20 4.8
6 9.0 21 1.0
7 12.1 24 0.1
8 3.0 25 1.8
9 1.6 27 0.1
10 12.4 28 0.4
11 0.4 30 1.1
12 4.4 35 0.1
13 0.4 40 0.6
Mean number of trips taken = 8.87
2 9
Table 48. Number of times drove self for trips away from residence during a typical
week ( N= 711)
# drove self Percent # drove self Percent
0 8.7 14 3.5
1 2.6 15 2.7
2 4.8 16 0.1
3 6.2 17 0.6
4 9.0 18 0.6
5 12.6 20 0.1
6 8.5 21 3.3
7 11.4 24 0.4
8 3.8 25 0.3
9 1.2 28 1.3
10 12.0 29 0.4
11 0.7 30 0.1
12 3.2 35 0.7
13 0.6 38 0.1
45 0.1
Mean number of times drove self = 7.61
To get an idea of daily travel patterns, respondents were asked to report on their driving
the day before completing the questionnaire. On the day prior to taking the survey,
respondents reported that they left their residence to go out up to 10 times, with most
taking one trip ( 37.2%), or two trips ( 34.0%) ( Table 49). The majority ( 86.0%) drove
themselves on those trips ( Table 50; also see Appendix A). Of those who didn’t go out
that day, most ( 81.9%) noted the reason they did not take a trip was because they did not
need to go anywhere as opposed to experiencing a barrier of some nature ( Table 51).
Table 49. Number of times participant went out ( N= 711)
# of trips out Percent
0 12.4
1 37.2
2 34.0
3 10.0
4 3.8
5 1.1
6 0.7
7 0.4
9 0.1
10 0.1
Mean M= 1.7
3 0
Table 50. Type of transportation used ( N= 645)
Mode of transportation Percent
Own vehicle, drove self 86.0
Own vehicle, someone else drove 9.1
Passenger in someone else’s vehicle 8.5
Walk 5.0
Bicycle 1.7
Bus 1.1
Van service 0.8
Other 0.8
Taxi 0.5
Other public transportation 0.3
Table 51. Reasons for not going out ( N= 166)
Reason Percent
Didn’t need to go anywhere 81.9
Not feeling well 7.8
Gasoline too expensive 6.6
No one available to drive me 5.4
Unable to leave house due to health problems 5.4
Other 5.4
Do not drive at night 4.2
Lack of adequate/ convenient public transportation 3.0
Unreliable vehicle 2.4
Bad weather 1.8
Public transportation too expensive 0.6
Poor road conditions 0.6
Too much traffic 0.0
If unable to drive in the future, the majority of respondents ( 71.5%) would prefer to ride
with a family member or friend in a private vehicle ( Table 52). Public transportation
( 23.6%) and senior van service ( 29.4%) are much more favorable as a means of
transportation than taxi ( 12.6%). Approximately one- fifth ( 19.7%) of the respondents
believe that walking would be an important form of transportation should they not be able
to drive in the future. A large number, more than a quarter, however, commented that
they do not know how they would get around if unable to drive.
In the two months prior to the survey, the majority of respondents ( 67.5%) did not have a
need to get a ride from someone else ( Table 53). Those who did need to ride with
someone else most often rode with a spouse, son or daughter, neighbor, or friend ( Table
54; Appendix A). Most of the time the respondents felt that it was either no problem, or
just a small problem, to find a ride with someone else. Their biggest concern was feeling
that they didn’t want to depend on others for rides ( Table 55). Quite a large number of
3 1
respondents felt that it would be difficult to reside in their current home if they were no
longer able to drive ( 56%) ( Table 56).
Table 52. Getting around in the future if unable to drive ( N= 720)
Mode of transportation Percent
Ride with family or friend 71.5
Senior van service 29.4
Don’t know 26.7
Public transportation 23.6
Walk 19.7
Taxi 12.6
Other 2.6
Table 53. How often rode with someone else in the last two months ( N= 729)
Frequency Percent
Never 67.5
Once a month 11.0
Twice a week or more 8.4
Twice a month 6.3
Once a week 5.6
Every day 1.2
Table 54. Person rode with when riding with someone else ( N= 630)
Person Percent
Spouse/ partner 49.5
Friend 34.9
Son or daughter 27.3
Neighbor 11.7
Other relative 8.3
Someone else 3.2
Grandchild 2.5
3 2
Table 55. Concerns when getting a ride with someone else ( N= 514)
Concerns
No
problem
%
Small
problem
%
Large
problem
%
Mean*
Don’t like to feel dependent on others 33.5 31.5 35.1 2.0
Worry about imposing on others 43.0 35.8 21.2 1.8
Have to fit into another person’s schedule 45.3 36.9 17.8 1.7
Feel embarrassed asking for a ride 57.8 27.2 15.0 1.6
Don’t know many people willing to help 54.5 28.0 17.5 1.6
Feel obligated to reciprocate 66.9 22.0 11.1 1.4
Concern about person’s driving ability 70.2 24.2 5.6 1.4
Other 82.5 4.8 12.7 1.3
* Mean rating is average of 1 = no problem, 2 = small problem & 3 = large problem
Table 56. Difficult to continue to reside in current home if no longer able to drive
( N= 704)
Difficult Percent
Strongly disagree 14.1
Disagree 30.0
Agree 36.1
Strongly agree 19.9
Perceptions of Transportation in the Community
There is a very high satisfaction rating among respondents regarding the ability to get
around in their community with 47.4% being satisfied and 35.3% being very satisfied
( Table 57). Respondents feel that the quality of transportation available in their
community is fair to good, but their satisfaction with the quality of dependable public
transportation and variety of transportation ranges mostly from very poor to fair ( Table
58).
Table 57. Satisfaction with ability to get around in community ( N= 719)
Satisfaction Percent
Very dissatisfied 7.4
Dissatisfied 9.9
Satisfied 47.4
Very satisfied 35.3
3 3
Table 58. Quality of transportation services in community ( N= 613)
Description
Very
Poor
%
Poor
%
Fair
%
Good
%
Very
Good
%
Mean
Adequate parking provided for
people with disabilities/ health
problems
8.1 11.9 26.3 41.7 12.0 3.4
Able to get to most places wishing to
go 15.7 12.9 22.5 31.6 17.3 3.2
Convenient transportation for people
with disabilities/ health issues 17.1 22.1 33.3 23.0 4.5 2.8
Offering dependable public
transportation 23.4 25.6 29.4 17.7 4.0 2.5
Variety of transportation services 22.8 25.3 31.3 16.6 3.9 2.5
Respondents feel very strongly that driving conditions in their communities could be
greatly improved if cell phone usage while driving was banned ( 72.6%) and road
construction was completed more quickly ( Table 59). They also noted better moving
violation enforcement ( 48.9%) and better highway maintenance ( 49.3%) as desirable
improvements.
Respondents were asked what types of difficulties with driving they have in their own
communities. The majority of respondents feel that the biggest concerns, which are a
small or large problem in their communities, are inconsiderate drivers, dealing with
traffic congestion, that traffic is too hectic, and poor road conditions ( Table 60). With
respect to specific concerns of respondents, they tend to think that potholes are not
repaired in a reasonable amount of time. They are split as to adequate lighting and
readability of signs for night driving ( Table 61). Also see Appendix A.
Table 59. If still driving, recommendations to improve driving conditions in
community or area ( N= 671)
Improvement Percent
Ban cell phone usage 72.6
Speed up road construction improvements 62.0
Better highway maintenance 49.3
Better enforcement of moving violations ( tickets, etc.) 48.9
More reflectors/ paint lines better 41.9
More lighting around signs 31.3
Larger lettering on signs 29.8
More driver education 28.9
More signs/ add road signs where needed 21.0
Improve exit/ entrance ramps 17.4
Reduced speed limit 10.4
Other 9.1
3 4
Table 60. Driving difficulties in community ( N= 679)
Difficulty No
problem
%
Small
problem
%
Large
problem
%
Mean
Inconsiderate drivers 12.4 47.9 39.8 2.3
Dealing with traffic congestion 38.7 44.3 17.0 1.8
Traffic too hectic 35.7 48.8 15.5 1.8
Poor road conditions 33.5 52.1 14.4 1.8
Cost of owning/ operating a car is too much 48.6 38.2 13.2 1.7
Headlight glare from oncoming traffic 43.3 45.4 11.3 1.7
Driving at night 52.2 35.1 12.7 1.6
Parking 61.7 29.3 9.0 1.5
Fear of crime 56.6 35.1 8.2 1.5
Being able to see signals, signs, lane markings 65.6 29.8 4.6 1.4
Narrow lanes 65.2 30.9 3.9 1.4
Driving through construction zones 63.7 31.5 4.9 1.4
Poor weather conditions 61.6 33.3 5.1 1.4
Worried about getting lost 85.8 11.2 3.1 1.2
Entering/ exiting the highway 78.8 18.1 3.1 1.2
Medical/ health difficulties 84.9 11.8 3.4 1.2
Not trusting ability to drive 90.2 8.3 1.5 1.1
Feeling confident about driving 92.8 5.4 1.8 1.1
Difficulty handling car 97.1 2.0 0.9 1.0
3 5
Table 61. Concerns about local traffic, roads and streets, and street signs in
community ( N= 664)
Concern
Strongly
disagree
%
Disagree
%
Not
Sure
%
Agree
%
Strongly
agree
%
Mean
Enough lanes to accommodate
all traffic 47.8 14.8 .2 32.0 5.2 2.3
Potholes repaired in a
reasonable amount of time 22.9 40.9 11.2 21.0 4.1 2.4
Signs confusing 8.0 56.8 14.6 18.7 1.9 2.5
Signs are missing 4.9 39.8 28.5 22.0 4.7 2.8
Street signs are readable at
night 9.4 31.8 13.6 40.1 5.2 3.0
Adequate lighting for night
driving 8.1 31.0 16.6 38.9 5.4 3.0
Traffic moves too fast 7.0 39.2 14.1 31.1 8.7 3.0
Street signs provide advance
warning about upcoming
major intersections
5.5 23.5 17.1 48.7 5.3 3.2
Signs are in locations that
allow enough response time 3.6 25.0 12.1 55.5 3.9 3.3
Signs are large enough to see
from distance 5.7 26.0 7.0 54.4 6.9 3.3
Often traffic delays 3.5 27.6 12.2 44.8 11.9 3.3
Stop signs and traffic signals
are easy to see 2.6 18.0 7.9 65.5 6.0 3.5
Bridges are well maintained 2.6 9.9 24.6 57.1 5.7 3.5
Lane marking are clear 1.6 16.3 8.2 67.7 6.2 3.6
Street signs are easy to
understand 1.5 13.5 7.2 69.9 7.8 3.7
Knowledge and Use of Public Transportation
A large number ( 40.3%) of respondents have no knowledge of public transportation
available in their communities, which correlates with the high percentage that would have
difficulty continuing to reside in their current home should they no longer be able to drive
( Table 62). The majority of respondents ( 95.1%) reported no use of public transportation
in the two months prior to this survey ( Table 63).
The respondents of this survey reported many different problems with public
transportation ( Table 64). Some problems of the highest concern are accessibility
( getting to the stop or station), that the public transportation does not go where they need
to go, it takes too much time, and there is no adequate shelter from the weather while
waiting. In general, the respondents feel that they do not have difficulty in boarding the
3 6
transportation that is available, that they are able to get a seat, that the vehicles are
maintained adequately, and that the cost of public transportation is not too expensive.
Also see Appendix A.
Table 62. Knowledge of public transportation available in community ( not
including taxis) ( N= 719)
Transportation Percent
Yes 59.7
No 40.3
Table 63. Amount of personal public transportation usage in past two months
( N= 728)
Frequency of usage Percent
Every day 0.3
Twice a week or more 0.8
Once a week 0.8
Twice a month 0.8
Once a month 2.2
Never 95.1
Table 64. If public transportation is available, the extent of problems associated
with usage ( N= 561)
Problem
No
problem
%
Small
problem
%
Large
problem
%
Mean
Does not go where needed 21.9 32.4 45.7 2.2
Accessibility ( getting to the stop or station) 31.2 28.0 40.8 2.1
Adequate shelter from the weather while
waiting 23.6 42.5 33.8 2.1
Takes too much time 23.4 39.7 36.9 2.1
Transfers are difficult 41.1 40.6 18.3 1.8
Worried about crime 55.3 31.8 12.9 1.6
Getting information about fares, routes, and
schedules 54.2 35.1 10.8 1.6
Other 65.2 9.1 25.8 1.6
Too expensive 62.0 30.0 7.9 1.5
Difficulty boarding 72.8 18.3 8.9 1.4
Vehicles are poorly maintained 63.5 30.0 6.5 1.4
Being able to get a seat 78.4 16.1 5.4 1.3
3 7
Driving Experience
The majority of respondents who no longer drive have been drivers in the past ( 82.8%),
with more than 50% of them having stopped driving within the last 4 years ( Tables 65
and 66). Only 23.9% have moved to a new residence since they stopped driving but, of
those, most ( 93.0%) cite transportation problems as their reason for moving ( Tables 67
and 68).
Table 65. Respondent was a driver in the past ( N= 93)
Driver in past Percent
Yes 82.8
No 17.2
Table 66. Number of years since stopped driving ( N= 62)
Number of years Percent
less than one year 12.9
1 16.1
2 16.1
3 6.5
4 11.3
5 8.1
6 1.6
7 4.8
8 3.2
10 8.1
12 1.6
19 1.6
20 4.8
21 1.6
46 1.6
Table 67. Moved to new residence since they stopped driving ( N= 67)
Moved Percent
Yes 23.9
No 76.1
Table 68. Transportation problems influenced decision to move ( N= 357)
Problems Percent
Yes 93.0
No 7.0
3 8
Non- drivers noted that problems with transportation most heavily affect going to the
doctor, shopping, and recreation and social activities; although more than 60% feel that
transportation issues are never a problem with any of their trips ( Table 69).
Respondents were asked about certain driving problems and how those problems affected
their decision to stop driving. More than 50% of respondents feel inconsiderate drivers,
night driving, headlight glare from oncoming traffic, that traffic was too hectic, and not
trusting their ability to drive primarily contributed to their decision to stop driving.
Table 69. The extent that transportation problems interfere with specific trips
( N= 145)
Type of trip Never
%
Sometimes
%
Often
% Mean
Doctor 60.0 29.0 11.0 1.5
Visit friends 63.0 22.0 15.0 1.5
Grocery or drug store 63.9 25.6 10.5 1.5
Shopping for non- grocery items 60.7 28.1 11.1 1.5
Recreation activities ( movies, sports) 60.9 27.3 11.7 1.5
Visit family 70.1 17.3 12.6 1.4
Place of worship 71.2 17.8 11.0 1.4
Social activities 66.1 23.6 10.2 1.4
Volunteer activities 70.8 16.8 12.4 1.4
Other 76.7 10.0 13.3 1.4
Work or school related 81.4 6.9 11.8 1.3
3 9
Table 70. Effect the following problems had on the decision to stop driving ( N= 128)
Problems
No
problem
%
Small
Problem
%
Large
Problem
%
Mean
Inconsiderate drivers 26.1 42.9 31.1 2.1
Driving at night 34.8 33.9 31.3 2.0
Headlight glare from oncoming traffic 35.7 40.0 24.3 1.9
Traffic too hectic 39.5 36.0 24.6 1.9
Not trusting ability to drive 46.3 28.9 24.8 1.8
Dealing with traffic congestion 50.0 26.7 23.3 1.7
Poor road conditions 41.2 43.9 14.9 1.7
Feeling confident about driving 55.6 19.7 24.8 1.7
Poor weather conditions 46.2 37.6 16.2 1.7
Medical or health difficulties 51.6 24.6 23.8 1.7
Ability to see signals, signs and lane
markings 53.9 27.8 18.3 1.6
Narrow lanes 55.8 33.6 10.6 1.6
Parking 58.1 29.1 12.8 1.6
Cost of owning/ operating vehicle too much 60.9 28.9 10.2 1.5
Entering or exiting the highway 60.9 24.3 14.8 1.5
Driving through construction zones 65.8 23.1 11.1 1.5
Fear of crime 56.5 33.9 9.6 1.5
Worried about getting lost 73.3 14.7 12.1 1.4
Difficulty handling vehicle 70.2 17.5 12.3 1.4
4 0
4 1
IV. CONCLUSIONS
A number of significant facts emerged from the research.
1. Data show that those seniors we surveyed at the senior centers are more at risk of
being isolated and unable to access community services than the seniors we
surveyed through the mailed survey.
􀂃 Senior center attendees are slightly older ( 73 years vs. 70 years).
􀂃 The educational level of center attendees is lower with 56.9% of them having
less than a college degree compared to 26% of the general population.
􀂃 48% of the attendees live alone compared to 29% of all seniors, and 66% have
an annual income of less than $ 20,000 as compared to 16% of all seniors in
the study.
􀂃 53% of senior center attendees rate their health as “ fair” or “ poor” compared
to 24% of others in the study.
􀂃 Of the seniors in the senior centers who participated in the study, 48% live
alone compared to 30% in the mail survey sample.
􀂃 A much higher percentage of senior center attendees do not drive and do not
own a vehicle relative to the mail survey group.
􀂃 A somewhat higher percentage of those at the senior centers have reduced
driving in the past two years and a much larger percentage have stopped
driving in the past two years than the general population of Pima County
seniors..
Because of the lower socio- economic status of the senior center sample, there is
evidence those who are not as well off economically and those who are older are
likely to experience greater transportation related problems than seniors with
more resources. This finding is consistent with the research reviewed in Section
II.
2. Seniors are responsible for most of their own transportation needs.
􀂃 Seniors make an average of 8.87 trips a week, or an average of one a day. For
almost 90% of those trips seniors report driving themselves.
􀂃 Less than 5% of seniors interviewed use any type of public or senior/ disabled
transportation services.
3. At the same time, seniors’ driving habits are changing.
􀂃 53% of senior center attendees and 42% of mail survey respondents report
driving less in the past 2 years.
Though self- reliance is likely desirable, older seniors will need transportation
alternatives as they reduce and, ultimately, stop driving.
4 2
4. Seniors need more transportation options to stay active and involved. The vast
majority of the “ trips” they make on a daily/ weekly basis are for social events, to
do “ errands,” or go to church. Several of the study’s findings suggest their ability
to continue to be active and to maintain a fulfilling lifestyle is harmed by lack of
transportation.
􀂃 Seniors who are “ mobility impaired” feel that public transportation is not
usable because of their special needs, or long waits, or they live in areas where
these services are not available.
􀂃 31 % of diary respondents and 27% of mail survey respondents cited less
participation in leisure activities in the past two years.
􀂃 56% feel that it would be difficult to remain in their current home if they are
no longer able to drive.
􀂃 24% have moved into a new residence since they stopped driving.
Research demonstrates that active and involved seniors are more likely to retain
their physical and mental health. Thus, transportation alternatives are needed to
help them maintain involvement for their personal, as well as societal, well- being.
5. While 71% of the mail survey respondents would prefer a friend or family member
to drive when they cannot, the 48% of seniors who live alone and the 29% with
limited family and social networks, may have limited options. This could
disproportionately affect those who have relocated to the area upon retirement.
6. Forty percent of respondents have no knowledge of public transportation services
available in their communities. Those who do know about it rarely use it primarily
because they feel it does not go where needed, is not accessible, there is
inadequate shelter from the weather while waiting, and it takes too much time.
The lack of knowledge and use of public transportation is a concern as this is
clearly an option for seniors who are no longer able to drive but are still mobile
enough to do some walking.
7. Seniors feel that improving the quality of transportation services in the community
will involve more dependable transportation ( 49%) and having a variety of
options for transportation services ( 48%).
4 3
V. RECOMMENDATIONS
1. While seniors who are currently using senior centers are actively involved, the
fact that they have more risk factors will require that programs and services be
more proactive in keeping them engaged in the community. Planners will likely
need to work with health care and in- home service providers as well as
community- based service providers.
2. While the vast majority of seniors are still driving, other resources will be
required as more and more of them are unable to operate a motor vehicle safely.
And since the majority of seniors do not currently know of, and/ or use public
transportation, a significant effort will need to be put into outreach and public
education regarding transportation alternatives when driving is no longer an
option.
3. Since many seniors are voluntarily cutting back on their driving, community
organizations, businesses, and churches should be encouraged to support
alternative transportation options to keep seniors involved.
4. More housing options for seniors need to be developed that are near medical and
shopping services so that seniors have greater access.
4 4
4 5
APPENDIX A: OPEN ENDED RESPONSES
4 6
4 7
Comments about driving behavior changes:
• Don't drive at night as much as I used to. Don't drive as many miles in a day as I used to.
• I drive more, time and distance.
• I have not changed my driving habits.
• I let my companion drive more when going to the same place.
• I only go 2 or 3 miles in home area.
• I periodically read the drivers handbook to know the laws.
• I try to make only right turns.
• Nothing changed.
Alternatives to driving:
• Bicycle
• Change residence to one closer to where I need to go.
• Hire a driver.
• Pay someone to drive.
• We need more info & better public transportation
Public transportation comments:
• I live about 7 miles from any public transportation.
• No public transportation in our area.
Other forms of transportation
• A co- worker ( 4)
• Parents - ages 87 and 85.
• Some locals will take you sometimes for gas & for $ 50 to the city for doctors.
• Someone else: taxi or shuttle
Riding with others:
• Anyone expects you to pay for gas and sodas and food and $ 50 too. Too expensive.
• Friends share rides when we go out. Don't depend on any one.
• I have no vehicle at the moment
• It would hurt her feelings if I declined her carpool once a month to our club meeting
• Never need to ask.
• This isn't a current issue
• We always ride with spouse/ partner
• We trade off, take turns
Suggestions for transportation improvements:
• 1. Many drivers seem ignorant of the " rules of the road". How about a " rule of the day" in the
local newspaper? 2. Enforce speed limits. Autos that pass me at 20- 50 percent over the limits
often plug the next intersection when I reach it as the light turns green. It will reduce congestion!
• A light rail system between Tucson and Phoenix.
• Advance signs warning of double right turn lanes.
• Better maintenance of neighborhood streets.
• Better screening of 65+ drivers
• Bus pullouts and right turn lanes
• Bus ramps for stops to let cars by.
• Carpool lanes in Seattle are enforced 6 a. m. to 9 p. m. Other drivers encouraged to call &
report cheaters.
• Clear trees and brush around signs
• Connect Syder Road
• Crack down on aggressive drivers.
• Cross town freeway.
4 8
• Do not close all highway exits!!!!!
• East/ west and north/ south freeways.
• Enforce laws. Also, drivers use or stay in left lane. Bicycle lane below the posted limit.
• Enforce penalties for running lights at intersections.
• Enforce speed limits!
• Enforce turns on green arrows only.
• Get rid of bullshit circles in intersections.
• I don't like reflector bumps. Good paint - yes. Other states don't use reflector bumps
• Keeping tire debris off highway.
• Larger street signs!
• Left on arrow only at First and River Rd.
• Limit entrance ramps in downtown area.
• Limit growth.
• Long wait at RR crossing
• Make lights consistent, e. g. leading green arrow.
• Make road construction crews move signs when not applicable. Example: " R/ H. lane closed
ahead" at 9: 00 in the morning: true. Since I pay attention to these signs, having seen the
need to move to the next lane, I do. Now is 2: 00 in the afternoon, the sign still there I again
move over, but R/ H lane no longer blocked do to others who pay no attention to signs, I can't
make a right turn where I need to. I feel I want to strangle some one.
• Make signs easier to understand & give more advanced notice for necessary lane changes
• Mandatory driver's test for the elderly.
• More aviation type roads.
• More left turn lights.
• More public transportation.
• More right turn lanes @ intersections.
• Need a cross town freeway.
• Need some cross town freeways.
• No passing zones & speed humps.
• Prohibit U- turns at ALL major intersections that have traffic signals.
• Red light runners. People drive faster in town then on I- 10.
• Road signs ( sheet) placed on dividers before street, i. e. Roller Coaster Rd. placement.
• Ticket slow drivers as well as speeders.
• Too many fatalities from excess speed! Needs reduced.
• Trim shrub/ plants back at corners to view oncoming traffic better
• Turn stoplights to flashing red during night hours ( 6 pm to 7 am).
Community transportation problems:
• After construction street signs take too long to replace.
• Have a sign indicating the next main cross street placed one block before the intersection to
allow cars to get into the correct lane to make a turn.
• Houghton in Tucson should have been planned for a four lane divided highway and the right
of way established long ago. Stupid lack of planning and foresight at A. D. O. T. Complicated
over kill at some bridges, as at Duval on I- 19.
• In general, Tucson roads were built for a less populated community.
• Interstate 10 should be diverted north- west of Tucson toward San Manuel, down the San
Pedro Valley and hook up to existing I- 10.
• There are many speeders ( excessive) on the road.
• Traffic moves too fast. I agreed with this but not because speed limits are too high, they're not.
• Tucson planning has allowed much too much outlying development without considering
impact of increased traffic. However, increasing traffic lanes just seems to encourage more
development. Look at Phoenix for a terrible example.
4 9
• Turn signals should all be same - not some leading left turn, etc. It confuses all drivers.
Crosswalk lights should all operate the same, i. e. all stop on red - not have flashing lights.
Public transportation issues:
• Bus doesn't run on Romero anymore
• Not on time and take a very long time
Public transportation use:
• Don't have any info. on public transp. It would be very helpful to have info that CLEARLY
AND SIMPLY explains availability, cost, schedules & #' s of such services
• I only use it to return home from jury duty.
Other public transportation concerns:
• Availability.
• Have never used any public transportation.
• Haven't had a need. Don't know the answers. I would call my son.
• I do not have buses close to my house.
• I'm asthmatic so doubt that I could breathe well on a bus.
• I'm near 90 and very ill and cannot go anywhere without personal care and help.
• My home in Ajo is 100 miles from Casa Grande, 120 from Phoenix & 130 from Tucson.
Every month I have to see a Dr. in one of these places.
• No buses run by us. Nearest is about 5 miles away.
• Not enough north/ south routes.
• Summer heat deters me from walking to and waiting at bus stop.
• The nearest bus stop is 2 miles away. I live outside city limits.
• Times of day that I would need transportation.
• Unreliable - took bus 3 times to work. Was late each time.
Other comments:
• 1. Cameras at major traffic intersections please. 2. Enforce carpool lanes. 3. Increase
carpool lane 55 mph mandatory speed limit. 5. More separate bike lanes. 6. Complete
bike/ walk paths along Santa Cruz River.
• 1. Generally speaking, the whole country needs better driver’s education. Not just Tucson,
or the state of Arizona. 2. We need better drivers license testing. Who gives a hoot if you
can parallel park? It should be can you enter and exit I- 10 properly! When pulling on to I- 10
and you slow down on the on ramp instead of picking up speed to match the traffic you are
merging with, you are stupid and dangerous. 3. All the idiots who can't call their friends
before leaving home or work and just have to use a cell phone are dangerous.
• 1. Improved public transportation with a variety of alternatives allowing access to more
locations throughout the Tucson area should be a priority. 2. Road repair and maintenance
are severely lacking in Tucson.
• 1. Need more left turn arrows. 2. Left turn at beginning of green light. 3. Advance warning
street sign of all major intersections ( city and county). 4. New street sign put up after major
construction ( River & Dodge missing).
• 1. Sun Tran bus, no service on River Rd. to Oracle Rd. Need the # 15 buses to run Stone to
River and east on River Rd. to Campbell Ave. and then south to UA Mall. 2. Weekend
service from east side to west side. Also, last bus home is at 6: 45 p. m.
• A birth certificate is no true indicator of a person's age. Most people guess me to be 55 or 60
- because of my attitude about life. Use it or lose it just about covers everything, including
mind and body. Street conditions on the NW side are terrible, especially between Miracle
Mile and Wetmore Road, between Oracle & Romero Rd causing more trips to the front end
alignment.
• A light rail system between Tucson and Phoenix would be great. HG 86 needs to be widened
with all the building west of Tucson, including the Tohono O'odham Reservation.
5 0
• After 60 years of driving the U. S, I received my first ticket, failure to yield, because a biker ran
into my rear bumper. I went to driving school. What a joke. The young instructor was very
humorous and witty, but taught me nothing about safe driving. Nothing about the psychology
or dangers of today's fast moving society. I'm 78 years old. I hate to waste 5 hours of my life
listening to drivel.
• Ajo Transportation, owned by Kathy Boyd, is doing the best job they can to keep Ajo citizens
mobile in Ajo and Why. They also have regular trips to Phoenix & Tucson ( but none to Casa
Grande). This allows people to get to their Dr. and to do some big city shopping. The main
problem making it difficult to us their services for more general purposes is connecting with
other transportation systems so that one can get to the airport, at the zoo or visit friends
and/ or relatives. A brochure, web site,, telephone consultant or some other educational
device is needed to help people move about from the need of the line in Phoenix and Tucson.
• Any person caught driving while using a cell phone should get 10 years in a foreign prison.
• As I do not need to use public transportation yet, it is difficult to judge ease of using. I don't
have bus schedules nor a need to keep them handy. I do know there is a bus stop about a
quarter of a mile or less from my house, but do not know routes.
• At license renewal time, we are not even asked if we would like a driver's handbook. What
kind of " education" is that? How about a periodic public service announcement series on
local radio by the DPS - Highway patrol ( or equiv.) on tail gating, safety belts, stopping
distances, highway object avoidance maneuvers, moving left for emergency vehicles on side
of road, rear view mirror setting for best vision, when passing do not return to lane until you
see both head lamps in overhead mirror, stop behind limit line at intersections because that
person on your right, turning right, needs to see to your left. In short, help people to be more
courteous! It will reduce road rage.
• Bus stop on Kolb Speedway ( southwest corner) needs a screen for protection. Cooler would
be better.
• City streets in Tucson need to be improved ( bumps, road noise, holes, broken out pavement).
High traffic roads, such as Sabino Canyon, where speeds are excessive and noise levels in
the neighborhoods are high. Motorists' autos with one tail light out is a common occurrence.
I see at least two on each trip locally to store, post office, etc. Intersection at Tanque Verde
and Sabino Canyon road, need larger sign for no 180 degree turn for cars going east on
Tanque Verde.
• Closing a freeway for 3 years to add one lane in each direction. Who planned this? The 3
Stooges?
• Elderly driving in Green Valley is a hazard. Mandatory driver's tests for those over 55 is
warranted.
• For the elderly and the disabled, information access for transportation needs to be kept
simple.
• Houghton Road widening should be expedited. At times it takes much time to exit our
housing development. A right turn is difficult and a left turn nearly impossible.
• I am temporarily using a disability parking permit due to an injury. There is no place for me to
park close to my place of employment downtown. There is one handicapped parking special
permit space near, but it has been assigned to someone. I called city transportation to no
avail. It's a BIG problem for me getting into my work place on crutches. I work at Broadway
and Scott.
• I applied to Van Tran - Tucson city disability transportation. I DID NOT QUALIFY. I have had
and have: 13 brain tumors, pacemaker, thyroid disease, herniated disc, stenosis. I am
unable to walk very far. I live in constant pain. In order to qualify they wanted me to go to
their physical therapists. WHY? What would they know of my diseases. I am also partially
blind. I need say no more!
• I can't understand why Tucson hesitates on street cameras. We see red light runners several
times a day. We live directly north of Fry's in Crossroads Festival. Their northern most exit is
for semi trucks only. Drivers of passenger cars use it all the time. It is so dangerous when
we attempt to enter our complex.
5 1
• I didn't mind filling this out, however, these questions did not apply to me for I drive all the
time. That's part of my income. I find driving to be relaxing.
• I do not drive. Do not own a car. Need busses to malls and stores.
• I feel there should be officers of the law on the road patrolling the flow of traffic and stop the
use of cell phones on the road. I drive defensively for my safety, but I have had numerous
incidents when someone on a cell phone in the car almost hit me. If police officers cannot
patrol, there should be helicopters in the air to monitor potential dangerous drivers and
situations. A course of Drivers Education in high school for teens and defensive driving
would be a great asset for young and elderly drivers alike. I had a defensive driving course
by my police dept. in NJ while a volunteer on the ambulance as an EMT. I use this training
daily.
• I have a sister who is disabled and low income. She has been denied transportation by Van
Tran because of income level. Her income is barely enough to meet her basic needs. It
would seem that disability should play a more important role than income.
• I have looked into bus service, though I don't need to catch a bus. Nearest bus stop is 2
miles away. Routes are inconvenient to get to nearby stores, downtown & to where I work
( near airport). If I had to rely on buses I would have a serious problem! Some roads also do
not go through very safe areas.
• I have no knowledge of public transportation in my area. Busses would not be an option for
the elderly or infirm in many areas of suburban Tucson because of extreme heat, lack of
sidewalks, shelter, etc. Any realistic public transport would have to be on a pick- up basis.
• I hope this survey helps create concrete solutions and better transportation in Pima County. I
think we need to think about putting mass transit in place sooner than later like an EL or a
Metro system.
• I live in Green Valley where most people travel by their private cars. There is a large number
of elderly drivers who have a difficult transportation problem.
• I resent closing the freeway ramps for 3 years!! It should be done in stages. Dummies.
• I sometimes think about these problems: car jacking, inconsiderate drivers ( we have a lot of
them), road rage. We need more police officers on our streets day and night.
• I think I may be the exception to the rule - 85 year old people should be " with one foot in the
grave", but I am extremely healthy and very self sufficient.
• I think it would be useful to include refresher information on driving and safety tips - being
alert, no phones, pay attention to driving.
• I understand the importance of this survey, but since you are sending it out to people under
70, I recommend your group attend some sensitivity training and additional education
concerning senior citizens. The majority of today's seniors are very active and resent
questions like this survey. My wife and I play tennis 3 times a week and travel frequently.
However, I tried to answer so the survey will provide information that helps. When we can't
drive, we will have to move because public transportation is not available.
• I was born and raised in L. A. I witnessed the growth of traffic and construction of freeways.
As you can see, the condition of roads and construction of freeways did not help much.
Reason: the focus is on moving CARS, not PEOPLE. Pima County is clearly heading in that
same direction. Innovative thinkers must focus on moving PEOPLE not CARS. The idea of a
light rail system must be considered in the thought process. Like it or not, traffic growth is
upon us. San Francisco built the Bart System to move people into and out of the city. I
suggest Pima County take a good hard look at it.
• I would like to get to downtown Tucson for museums, convention center, etc., but I don't drive
because of the traffic, one- way streets and lack of parking. It would be nice to have a van or
a bus that ran every hour. There could be a fare which would make the service profitable.
• I would love to see public transportation so good and pollution free that we could virtually ban
private care use in Tucson. I think building more roads and widening streets is a band aide
solution that won't resolve the traffic problem.
• I would rather you call me @ 520- 387- 7823. It is easier for me to speak as opposed to
writing. I am aware of small things that make a big difference if something could be done to
improve it.
5 2
• I- 10 is the only major artery between Tucson and Phoenix and is very heavy with truck traffic;
something needs to be done about this. Tucson needs some crosstown freeway, traffic has
increased by leaps and bounds in the past few years and need some crosstown freeways.
• If law enforcement would enforce laws regarding " inattentive" drivers, i. e. eating, primping,
text messaging, telephones, etc., the traffic would be much safer. Also drivers, including 18
wheelers, who travel in the left lane and do not move over are an absolute disaster on I- 10.
Cops are the biggest problems on I- 10. They are arrogant, rude and jerks.
• If the speeders and red light and stop sign blowers were ticketed, especially the speeders,
Tucson could pave it's streets in gold.
• Important question not asked: How much do you drive ( in miles) annually.
• In general I find driving here a pleasure, but some road signs are not clear and I can see how
senior drivers may become confused and turn incorrectly, thus becoming lost.
• In my younger years, we were in the trucking business in the northern states. I have driven
trucks and I consider myself better than average driver and especially for my age. Divorced
at age 38, I have driven many, many miles by myself and no accidents or tickets.
• In regard to # 30 question, it is not a problem as yet, but my first consideration is " not trusting
my ability to drive". I will stop driving then.
• Issues involving construction of new homes are causing huge traffic problems in the
unincorporated parts of Tucson. Contractors should be required to widen roads and place
traffic signals around new housing complexes
• It is totally outrageous the length of time construction takes in Tucson. Most of those road
crews take more breaks than work. Cortaro and I- 10 - and just Cortaro is a good example.
They have screwed with that road since I moved here in 2001 and it just got finished.
Freeway on and exits on 6/ 15/ 07 to be closed for 3 years. Who are you people kidding?
They won't be done for 5 years. I for one plan to get out of Arizona next year and I'll never
come back. Tucson is where Phoenix was in 1986 when we left Arizona that time. They
won't stop growth here. I want no part of it. Someone needs to ask where Arizona will find
water in 20 years. There will be none.
• It might be a good idea not to do repairs of roads in the same area running the same ways.
Late spring for example - repair on Sunrise going both ways from Pantano to Campbell and
also decide to finish to final black top on River Road. There are more examples of this
happening around the city.
• It seems that ADOT & city & county do not work together on many matters. Law enforcement
in city and county does not enforce laws pertaining to big rigs on city streets, and the trucks
with large tires up high for tire flaps & headlights. It has cost my family 5 windshields & these
fools texting while they drive.
• Just to let you know that I resented the fact that you consider me old at 59. I would feel old
hopefully later in life and when I know I'm starting to have driving problems. Have been in
Arizona seven years now and have no problems driving - matter of fact have had no ticket in
34 years and health/ vision reaction time is still good. License doesn't expire until 2013, so
send me another form when the state considers me old and need yearly renewals.
• Lack of pull out lanes for buses on newly constructed road.
• Mandatory insurance creates unacceptable burden on working poor. If state dictates this
obligation, then the state needs to make available a set yearly fee ( minimum) within the reach
of the worker that has to drive to work to be a productive citizen in our society. Public
transportation is inadequate to meet this need. We do not need a class system in Arizona
where the rich drive and the poor walk.
• Most of our driving is on a Harley. Enforcing the current traffic laws would be nice.
• My eyes are not too bad, but larger street name signs would really help me. I compensate by
using a map or getting a computer map before I depart.
• My main concern while driving in our area is the number of people using cell phones & the
red light racers. In the 2 years since we permanently retired to the area, we have come close
to being hit no less than six times by folks trying to beat red lights or pre- occupied with phone
use.
5 3
• My wife is 80 years old and I have a Downs syndrome daughter who depends on us for
transportation.
• Need a cross town freeway in Tucson. Tucson Foothills does not get its fair share of motor
fuel tax revenues since it is an unincorporated area. I like the idea of a truck route that
bypasses Phoenix and Tucson. Need a law to keep trucks in the right lane on highways.
• Need more public transportation into neighborhoods where old folks don't have to walk so far
with groceries or shopping. I'm a walker, but not when I'm loaded down with groceries.
• Never put chip seal on any road. Loose, flying gravel is dangerous. Could easily destroy an
eye when walking my dog along a road. It did ruin my Ford Bronco windshield. Road
projects take forever, many very poorly designed with poor quality that soon needs repairs.
The concept of drainage seems beyond the mentality of road builders here. Much waste and
inefficiency. In Green Valley, completing the E. Frontage road south of Continental was
planned in the 1970' s and hasn't happened yet. An interchange is badly needed on the 4+
mile distance between Continental and Canoa. On I- 19 on the Indian Reservation there is a
full interchange that is useless - no roads there. We need engineers with brains that know
how to build a decent road, quickly and do it right. Closing the exits on I- 10 in downtown
Tucson for 3 years is simply intolerable.
• No buses in my area. Would need more van type transportation.
• On major streets you should place a sign indicating the next major intersection/ cross street
name so a driver has time to get into the proper lane to make a turn. Not everyone knows
the city like a cab driver. This would improve the traffic flow at busy intersections.
• People over 65 need to be retested more often. Example: 65- 70 written and driving - every 2
years, 70 and up - written and driving annually. There should be some kind of reflex test
( reaction time), more frequent and tougher eye tests. THERE ARE OLDER PEOPLE OUT
THERE WHO SHOULD NOT BE DRIVING.
• Please get the people in Arizona to use their signal lights!!
• Plentiful, flexible, public transportation available at most hours would greatly improve quality
of life in general in Tucson and give me more confidence about my independence as I
become older.
• Questions unanswered do not apply to me. Also, I have never used the bus or other public
transportation, so some answers are speculative. I did not answer question 40, as I could not
see its relevancy.
• Red light runners are a big problem! Northwest side is growing faster than the roads can
handle.
• Set up mechanism to allow people who are forced to stop driving to identify themselves and
their transportation need for planning on how best to support their needs. Stop those who
misuse emergency services for routine transportation needs just because it's free. Provide
emergency transportation and require them to use appropriate services when needed.
Support local churches in providing bus transportation for members who do not have
transportation to and/ or from church.
• Should do check points occasionally for drivers license and insurance eligibility.
• Since there are no freeways ( to speak of) to get around Tucson, all major N/ S or E/ W
thoroughfares need to be 3 lanes each direction, minimum, with adequate left and right turn
lanes. All lights should monitor to detect traffic flow or lack thereof.
• Stop red light runners, larger lettering on local street signs.
• Street lighting in Tucson is not great, but probably as good as can be, while allowing
reasonable dark sky for nearby observatories. Road signage is generally good. My only
complaint is that some street name signs are either poorly sited or poorly lit, making them
difficult to see far enough away. It seems that unrestrained development will result in a race
to see which will make Tucson unlivable first: run out of water or run out of infrastructure,
particularly roads. For goodness sake, speed up road improvement projects. Not more
projects, just finish them faster.
• Street signs should be larger and/ or farther from the intersection, providing more reaction
time.
5 4
• Take a lesson from: Washington, Oregon, California, Ohio, Indiana and others and stop
incompetent contractors from taking two or more years to complete a road improvement that
would take six months or less to complete.
• The city and country are lax in enforcing traffic laws. What can we expect when the LEO's
don't observe the laws themselves. It is a rare day when you see patrol cars observing the
speed limit and red lights. I wonder how many people are injured each year just because the
traffic laws are not enforced?
• The lighting is non- existent on the east side of Town Pass Kolh. Speedway needs widening
past " Como Seco"?. Except for some pot holes, Tucson is pretty good.
• The road construction is ridiculous! Roads are down to one lane and there are no workers to
be seen… All this will keep visitors from coming to Tucson- meaning everyone will lose
money, except for the construction companies involved.
• There is a need for more street lights and sidewalks. In some places without sidewalks and
without lighting, pedestrians are very much at risk at night.
• There is no public transportation where I live. Roads are in TERRIBLE shape - pot holes are
NEVER filled. After one storm, a road was torn up, and when the transportation dept. fixed it
the road was even worse. They should have been made to come back and do the job
correctly. Over all - the transportation system for the East side and south east side of Tucson
is HORRIBLE. Not even available for most people. For now, we can drive our cars, but the
day may come when we'll have to sell our houses and move to a Senior Home just because
of lack of transportation and other services. Living here ( zip 85641) is not for the faint of
heart.
• This study is aimed at persons living within the city of Tucson. I live in the Catalina Foothills
and taxis would be about the only alternative to driving myself. That would be cost prohibitive
so I would probably have to relocate if I could no longer drive and my wife could no longer
drive.
• This survey looks like a disguised justification to spend more tax- payer money on public
transportation. Please count my votes!
• Ticket and pull drivers off the highway who are going way too slow.
• Too many wild drivers. Too many drivers using cell phones!
• Traffic lights in and around Tucson are confusing. Some have a leading green arrow, some
do not. Some have the left turn arrow come on, even when there are no cars present waiting
to turn. Others turn immediately red when there are no card waiting. I've even seen some
lights that have a short delay ( 5 seconds or so) before the green left turn arrow comes on.
This last one is aggravating because cars hesitate because they aren't sure if the arrow will
come on. Can you just make the lights consistent?
• Travel mainly by Van Tran
• Try to get more police men and women in the force to cut down on the speeders. They are
all over worked and under paid now, but with speeding tickets they could get more help and
better pay.
• Tucson has had major traffic problems for many years. We do not have enough parkways to
reduce the traffic on major arteries, i. e. Speedway, Broadway, 22nd Street. We need major
improvements to accommodate the growth of the city and the number of cars using our city
streets. The last bond election which finally passed may be solution though definitely much
delayed.
• Tucson needs a monorail system with all the large medians E & W. An above ground would
cost less and make more sense; with an E. W. and N. S. system more people could be
moved faster. Look at Disneyland. It was built in 1958 and still running strong.
• Tucson still needs freeways. Most problems are: cell phone users, red light runners, stop
and go - no freeways, not enough lanes for amount of traffic, roads in bad shape, rude, rude
drivers!
• We are very concerned about the safety of our roads and streets. It appears traffic has little
or no regulation perhaps because of the lack of law enforcement of our police - that are too
few for the number of vehicles on our streets and roads.
5 5
• We just moved here in Dec. 05. We love the area but I have never seen so many rude and
inconsiderate drivers. I truly believe that most do not understand traffic laws - especially
when making left turns.
• We live near I- 19, there have been a few accidents that have ended on frontage roads or
near homes. Think that better fences, guard rails or some other protection maybe needed
along some of the housing areas.
• We need a bus at least a couple of times a day in my neighborhood. My wife works so I have
no way to my Dr. or the stores. I am blind, but I can still take the bus.
• We need small size buses running north and south ( not the regular ones), then regular size
buses running east and west.
• We really do need reliable, convenient and relatively rapid public transportation in Tucson.
Let's get ahead of the rest of the southwest in that one.
• Weekend Rocky Point traffic is bad - tailgating, passing on right side, passing at
intersections, speeding.
• When I'm in town, can't wait to leave because of the traffic, lights and roads.
• Why is it, the State of AZ has to wait so many years before they decide to do something. It is
like other issues in any state. You wait so long & there is no fixing the problem.
• Wish public transportation was quick and convenient so I didn't have to drive so often.
• Would use bus if it came down Houghton. Nothing even close to go to mall, grocery store,
etc.
5 6
5 7
REFERENCES
Adler, Geri, and Susan Rottunda. 2006. " Older Adults' Perspectives on Driving
Cessation." Journal of Aging Studies 20 ( 3): 227- 235.
Alsnih, Rahaf, and David A. Hensher. 2003. " The Mobility and Accessibility
Expectations of Seniors in an Aging Population." Transportation Research Part A:
Policy and Practice 37 ( 10): 903- 916.
Bauer, Mary J., Susan Rottunda and Geri Adler. 2003. " Older Women and Driving
Cessation." Qualitative Social Work 2 ( 3): 309- 325.
Burns, Peter C. 1999. " Navigation and Mobility of Older Drivers." Journals of
Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences 54B ( 1): S49- 55.
Carp, Frances M. 1988. “ Significance of Mobility for the Well- Being of the Elderly.” In
Transportation in an Aging Society: Improving Mobility and Safety for Older Persons –
Volume 2: Technical Papers. 1- 20. Special Report no. 218. Washington, D. C.:
Transportation Research Board.
Collia, Demetra V., Joy Sharp and Lee Giesbrecht. 2003. " The 2001 National Household
Travel Survey: A Look into the Travel Patterns of Older Americans." Journal of Safety
Research 34 ( 4): 461- 470.
Coughlin, Joseph. 2001. Transportation and Older Persons: Perceptions and
Preferences. Washington, D. C.: AARP.
Dellinger, Ann M., et al., 2001. " Driving Cessation: What Older Former Drivers Tell
Us." Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 49 ( 4): 431- 435.
Gallo, Joseph J., George W. Rebok and Sandra E. Lesikar. 1999. " The Driving Habits of
Adults Aged 60 Years and Older." Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 47
( 3): 335- 341.
Gebers, Michael A., and Raymond C. Peck. 1992. " The Identification of High- Risk Older
Drivers through Age- Mediated Point Systems." Journal of Safety Research 23 ( 2): 81- 93.
Glasgow, Nina, and Robin M. Blakely. 2000. " Older Nonmetropolitan Residents'
Evaluations of their Transportation Arrangements." The Journal of Applied Gerontology
19 ( 1): 95- 116.
Hakamies- Blomqvist, Liisa. 2006. " Are there Safe and Unsafe Drivers?" Transportation
Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 9 ( 5): 347- 352.
Hensher, David A., and April J. Reyes. 2000. " Trip Chaining as a Barrier to the
Propensity to use Public Transport." Transportation 27 ( 4): 341- 361.
5 8
Hermanson, Sharon. 2005. Older Car Owners: The Use of Their Cars by Others. Data
Digest no. 124. Washington, D. C.: AARP. http:// www. aarp. org/ research/ housing-mobility/
transportation/ dd124_ cars. html. Accessed July 8, 2008.
Hildebrand, Eric D. 2003. " Dimensions in Elderly Travel Behaviour: A Simplified
Activity- Based Model using Lifestyle Clusters." Transportation 30 ( 3): 285- 306.
Houser, Ari. 2005. Community Mobility Options: The Older Person's Interest.
Washington, D. C.: AARP.
Kalata, Jean. 2005. The Effects of Gasoline Costs on U. S. Residents 50+. Washington,
D. C.: AARP.
Kostyniuk, Lidia P., and Jean T. Shope. 2003. " Driving and Alternatives: Older Drivers
in Michigan." Journal of Safety Research 34 ( 4): 407- 414.
Marottoli, Richard A., Carlos F. Mendes de Leon and Thomas A. Glass. 2000.
" Consequences of Driving Cessation: Decreased Out- of- Home Activity Levels." Journals
of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences 55B ( 6): S334- 40.
McKnight, A. James. 2003. " The Freedom of the Open Road: Driving and Older Adults."
Generations ( San Francisco, Calif.) 27 ( 2): 25- 31.
Nelson, Brittne M., and Katherine Bridges. 2006. Traveling the Roads in Rhode Island:
An AARP Member Survey. Washington, D. C.: AARP.
Persson, D. 1993. " The Elderly Driver: Deciding when to Stop." The Gerontologist 33
( 1): 88- 91.
Raitanen, Tarjaliisa, et al. 2003. " Why do Older Drivers Reduce Driving? Findings from
Three European Countries." Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and
Behaviour 6 ( 2): 81- 95.
Rosenbloom, Sandra. 2001. " Sustainability and Automobility among the Elderly: An
International Assessment." Transportation 28 ( 4): 375- 408.
Stowell- Ritter, Anita. 2006. 2006 Utah Transportation Survey: Aging and Mobility.
Washington, D. C.: AARP.
Stowell- Ritter, Anita, Audrey K. Straight and Ed Evans. 2002. Understanding Senior
Transportation: Report and Analysis of a Survey of Consumers Age 50+. Washington,
D. C.: AARP.
Straight, Audrey K. 1997. Co